Ok, I'll admit to having drunk some of the Scrum koolaid, but I don't think 'maturity' is the issue. Programming is a qualitatively different kind of endeavor than bridge-building. Project management methodologies that try to define everything up front are doomed to failure. Once you build a bridge or a skyscraper, it's going to remain the same for it's lifetime. Not so for software.
TFA sounds like scrum in some regards -- the setup of the feature list, the short implementation horizon. Especially the idea that you define features that will not be included, which suggests that the immediate development is only part of a process that will be repeated in the future to add more features. Repeat what's described in TFA every month and you're even closer to scrum.
My brother lives in a neighborhood with underground utility lines. It looks pretty nice except for the high tension lines that go right through the middle of the subdivision and the cooling towers about 5 miles away.
If you're going to start dropping names in this thread, you really ought to include Ricardo Semler. His books promote a similar management style (unmanagement style?).
Personally, I find it all very appealing, but hard to see how any of its applicable if it doesn't come from the absolute top of the management pyramid. I also share the concern that it's a model based on skimming the best employees and is bound to prove itself less effective if it becomes more widespread.
Oh yeah, we programmer's get all choked up when a salesman's gonna lose some commission.
Actually, I do have a couple serious things to say about this situation...
First, what a support department says has to be done has more to do with what's easy for support personnel that with what is really necessary. They don't care if all that needs to be changed is one registry key setting somewhere, it's easier to say to make everyone an admin and you know you've sidestepped all permissions issues. I've even found that automating ways to allow the minimum amount of priveleges for legacy code to execute has limited effect -- it's still easier for support people to continue with their old habits.
Second, about that legacy code. One of our programmers (not one involved in creating some of the legacy code that has security problems, BTW) pointed out that in relatively recent times, the official "Microsoft way" to do things involved practices which today are recognized as requiring extremely lax security. So even teams that make every effort to do things the 'right way' (with MS) end up with insecure code (or rewriting lots of code).
Somebody is paying for the computing and network resources that go into processing email. Unfortunately, those who are paying for it (AOL, Yahoo, and anyone running a email server) are not the ones who are benefiting from it ( Spammer's, political and non-profit orgs, etc. )
It doesn't seem at all odd to me that the organizations who ARE paying want to shift some of the cost to the people who are benefiting from it. And I'm 100% behind their effort to do so.
Now if they let you paste in an image, that would be really impressive. Probably the single most inconvenient thing about editing on the web is that once you copy an image, you need to create an image file, then browse or type in the path to upload it, then place it on the page. IMHO, simplifying that is more important than WYSIWYG for usability (I'm thinking Wiki text or ReST, not html).
I'm not saying I buy it, but the professors alleging that Apple will drop their OS, not that they'll stop writing their own software. The extra value Apple has is all in your face -- its the way things look and work.
If Apple gets to drop work on hidden things like drivers for usb remote controls, they can concentrate on the glossy stuff. And if the glossy stuff looks at the hardware, you'll still have to buy Apple iron (ok plastic) to get it.
So, though I know bashing Dvorak is almost as much fun as bashing Microsoft, it's not a completely crazy idea. Besides, if Apple loses you as a customer, what're you gonna do? They'll still probably provide the best user experience, so why not buy one?
Re:Perl is not too loose and messy
on
Beyond Java
·
· Score: 1
Any langauge can be obfusticated and C is perhaps the easiest to obfusticate.
And this is a typical response of a <insert name of frequently bashed programming language here> programmer.
I don't see how you can deny that different programming languages encourage different ways of writing programs. This tends to reinforce itself since the language then attracts people who like to program that way, creating the cultures that surround many languages. Most programmers familiar with the language in question will know exactly what I mean if I write that some chunk of code is written in C, but it looks like Pascal. Oops, make that Python and Java, I'm revealing how old I really am....
So, if you want to defend Perl, defend it! Tell us why the type of coding encourage by the language or the culture that surrounds it is better than some other language, either in general or for a specific purpose.
To be honest, I've used Perl only enough to come to dislike it pretty thoroughly. Python, on the other hand, I love and has cause a grizzled old C++ code jockey to consider a completely different understanding of what's important in a programming language. Maybe I'm missing something in Perl. So please, try to explain it to me. I'm listening.
We all know about hard to use software. Software designers who create programs the most people use incorrectly are to blame for creating bad software, not the users "do things wrong" repeatedly.
Similarly system admin's who create a network that most users, or most users of a certain class (e.g. code jockeys) abuse have created bad systems and the admins are to blame. Sysadmins are there for the benefit of the systems users, not the other way around.
You sysadmins want you're job to be easier? Hell, don't we all? That's fine. But do it in a way that lets your users do what they need to do, or if you choose not to, at least don't whine about them misbehaving.
It would be quite easy to achieve what you want on linux
Tempted as I am to use my mod points and give this a +1 funny, I will instead respond with a question. Have you, in fact, done this? If so, please post a howto somewhere so that we can all take advantage. My main workstation is now an ltsp terminal for a hot (in more ways than one) linux box that lives in a closet, and after some thrashing about sound works, for some things, well enough to get by.
Mysterious things happen with no sound card in the server. Java sound just plain doesn't work. Some things, with the proper preferences, look like they should work, but don't. XMMS, for no reason I can understand, can play files just fine, but completely locks up with an mp3 stream. mplayer works.
So please enlighten me. How do I go about this easy linux setup?
Hold on a minute. He's a manager. The question is, are you (and your cohorts) productive under him? If so, no matter how technically incompetent he is, he's a good manager (which isn't the same as saying you enjoy working for him).
Likewise, no matter how technically competent a manager is, if his deparatment doesn't get the job done, he's a bad manager.
But mostly they KNOW what they want and how they want it... And are willing to read through your manual to in the end work more efficient and save resources.
It appears you have a very different user population than I do.
This "blame the user" mentality is a major factor in why so much software sucks. Whatever the system, if most users of that system do the wrong thing, it's the SYSTEM's fault!
Like it or not, computer users' environment is one where they are asked repeatedly to confirm things unnecessarily. Probably hundreds of times a day for some. Of course uers will stop reading the messages and just click OK, that's the rational thing to do.
To steal a formula from the US defense secretary, we need to design systems to work for the users we have, not the users we would like to have.
Is anyone really browsing the web from their cell phone? PDA? The resolution and functionality in these things are terrible. We have a decade of hard experience behind us building good web browsers. Let's build one into devices that want to surf the web.
Hell yeah!
I've got a sidekick and find it surprisingly usable for web access -- Reading Slate on a train ride for example. Because of the Sidekick (aka Hiptop) limitations, some things I'd like to do are annoyingly difficult (e.g. checking traffic conditions where the only link to specific highways is a graphic map), and other things are AFAICT impossible (checking my ultimate team's schedule).
I don't expect web developers cater to those of use using smallish screens with no javascript or flash, but do think it reasonable that web sites not be hostile to such devices with no discernible benefit to the rest of the world.
Watching a TV may not be constitutionally protected, but a government mandate that changes a working television I own into a useless box of glass and lead skates awfully close to taking my property. I think there is something in the US constituion about that.
Well, other posters have mentioned the Treo. There's also PocketPC phones and the Hiptop/Sidekick. I'll really love my Sidekick as soon as it gets Javascript in the browser (real soon now....).
Most/.ers will probably hate it though since TMobile & Danger go out of their way to make it hard to add anything to the system that you didn't pay for. For me, it's a phone/email/ssh*/browser and I don't really care that I'd have to pay to get games or ringtones. (*one-time charge for ssh)
Slashdot Mirror
TFA sounds like scrum in some regards -- the setup of the feature list, the short implementation horizon. Especially the idea that you define features that will not be included, which suggests that the immediate development is only part of a process that will be repeated in the future to add more features. Repeat what's described in TFA every month and you're even closer to scrum.
My brother lives in a neighborhood with underground utility lines. It looks pretty nice except for the high tension lines that go right through the middle of the subdivision and the cooling towers about 5 miles away.
If you're going to start dropping names in this thread, you really ought to include Ricardo Semler. His books promote a similar management style (unmanagement style?).
Personally, I find it all very appealing, but hard to see how any of its applicable if it doesn't come from the absolute top of the management pyramid. I also share the concern that it's a model based on skimming the best employees and is bound to prove itself less effective if it becomes more widespread.
Suits, PHBs, etc.... They've always been against linux, haven't they?
Oh yeah, we programmer's get all choked up when a salesman's gonna lose some commission.
Actually, I do have a couple serious things to say about this situation...
First, what a support department says has to be done has more to do with what's easy for support personnel that with what is really necessary. They don't care if all that needs to be changed is one registry key setting somewhere, it's easier to say to make everyone an admin and you know you've sidestepped all permissions issues. I've even found that automating ways to allow the minimum amount of priveleges for legacy code to execute has limited effect -- it's still easier for support people to continue with their old habits.
Second, about that legacy code. One of our programmers (not one involved in creating some of the legacy code that has security problems, BTW) pointed out that in relatively recent times, the official "Microsoft way" to do things involved practices which today are recognized as requiring extremely lax security. So even teams that make every effort to do things the 'right way' (with MS) end up with insecure code (or rewriting lots of code).
It doesn't seem at all odd to me that the organizations who ARE paying want to shift some of the cost to the people who are benefiting from it. And I'm 100% behind their effort to do so.
If it was NOT meant to be an acronym, then where the hell did it come from?
Personally, I find Ajax just as annoying a term as Web 2.0.
Now if they let you paste in an image, that would be really impressive. Probably the single most inconvenient thing about editing on the web is that once you copy an image, you need to create an image file, then browse or type in the path to upload it, then place it on the page. IMHO, simplifying that is more important than WYSIWYG for usability (I'm thinking Wiki text or ReST, not html).
Please, please, please, do not confuse what makes your user happy with what sells.
Fluff sells. Usability (go figure) makes your users happy.
I'm not saying I buy it, but the professors alleging that Apple will drop their OS, not that they'll stop writing their own software. The extra value Apple has is all in your face -- its the way things look and work.
If Apple gets to drop work on hidden things like drivers for usb remote controls, they can concentrate on the glossy stuff. And if the glossy stuff looks at the hardware, you'll still have to buy Apple iron (ok plastic) to get it.
So, though I know bashing Dvorak is almost as much fun as bashing Microsoft, it's not a completely crazy idea. Besides, if Apple loses you as a customer, what're you gonna do? They'll still probably provide the best user experience, so why not buy one?
I don't see how you can deny that different programming languages encourage different ways of writing programs. This tends to reinforce itself since the language then attracts people who like to program that way, creating the cultures that surround many languages. Most programmers familiar with the language in question will know exactly what I mean if I write that some chunk of code is written in C, but it looks like Pascal. Oops, make that Python and Java, I'm revealing how old I really am....
So, if you want to defend Perl, defend it! Tell us why the type of coding encourage by the language or the culture that surrounds it is better than some other language, either in general or for a specific purpose.
To be honest, I've used Perl only enough to come to dislike it pretty thoroughly. Python, on the other hand, I love and has cause a grizzled old C++ code jockey to consider a completely different understanding of what's important in a programming language. Maybe I'm missing something in Perl. So please, try to explain it to me. I'm listening.
We all know about hard to use software. Software designers who create programs the most people use incorrectly are to blame for creating bad software, not the users "do things wrong" repeatedly.
Similarly system admin's who create a network that most users, or most users of a certain class (e.g. code jockeys) abuse have created bad systems and the admins are to blame. Sysadmins are there for the benefit of the systems users, not the other way around.
You sysadmins want you're job to be easier? Hell, don't we all? That's fine. But do it in a way that lets your users do what they need to do, or if you choose not to, at least don't whine about them misbehaving.
Mysterious things happen with no sound card in the server. Java sound just plain doesn't work. Some things, with the proper preferences, look like they should work, but don't. XMMS, for no reason I can understand, can play files just fine, but completely locks up with an mp3 stream. mplayer works.
So please enlighten me. How do I go about this easy linux setup?
Here's a few ideas
Think "ballet company"
Now there's a money-making proposition!
And both Silverstone and Ahanix feature (at least some) cases with built-in VFD's -- damn near essential for HTPCs
If a laptop is stolen, can't that "piece you have" be de-authorized? If not, there's hardly any point in having it.
Hold on a minute. He's a manager. The question is, are you (and your cohorts) productive under him? If so, no matter how technically incompetent he is, he's a good manager (which isn't the same as saying you enjoy working for him).
Likewise, no matter how technically competent a manager is, if his deparatment doesn't get the job done, he's a bad manager.
Indeed. They appear to have successfully Bought my senator
It appears you have a very different user population than I do.
This "blame the user" mentality is a major factor in why so much software sucks. Whatever the system, if most users of that system do the wrong thing, it's the SYSTEM's fault!
Like it or not, computer users' environment is one where they are asked repeatedly to confirm things unnecessarily. Probably hundreds of times a day for some. Of course uers will stop reading the messages and just click OK, that's the rational thing to do.
To steal a formula from the US defense secretary, we need to design systems to work for the users we have, not the users we would like to have.
I've got a sidekick and find it surprisingly usable for web access -- Reading Slate on a train ride for example. Because of the Sidekick (aka Hiptop) limitations, some things I'd like to do are annoyingly difficult (e.g. checking traffic conditions where the only link to specific highways is a graphic map), and other things are AFAICT impossible (checking my ultimate team's schedule).
I don't expect web developers cater to those of use using smallish screens with no javascript or flash, but do think it reasonable that web sites not be hostile to such devices with no discernible benefit to the rest of the world.
Watching a TV may not be constitutionally protected, but a government mandate that changes a working television I own into a useless box of glass and lead skates awfully close to taking my property. I think there is something in the US constituion about that.
The only reason I'd read the Book of Postfix is if I actually wanted to understand what the heck I was doin'
Well, other posters have mentioned the Treo. There's also PocketPC phones and the Hiptop/Sidekick. I'll really love my Sidekick as soon as it gets Javascript in the browser (real soon now....).
/.ers will probably hate it though since TMobile & Danger go out of their way to make it hard to add anything to the system that you didn't pay for. For me, it's a phone/email/ssh*/browser and I don't really care that I'd have to pay to get games or ringtones. (*one-time charge for ssh)
Most