Exactly - I spent a year running a Y2K lab, constantly running through key dates so that programmers could test code. Stuff broke - stuff broke UGLY. It took months to get most of it working properly, and if the systems I was testing had broken? People would have noticed. People would have sued.
This is strange. I recall reading a lengthy article about how Java got list sorting to use roughly the same number of cycles as C. My guess is either you used the wrong algorithm, used a poorly optimized JVM, or had some other setting set wrong. If Java was consuming more memory, you could be losing all your performance to garbage collection. But my experience with Java, sorting lists several hundred thousand items long, was that it worked perfectly fine and was very quick.
Entirely possible. I may at some point go back and review it, but essentially I had a huge local table (20,000 databases long, up to 20 rows wide) that was sortable by the user clicking on a column header. Therefore the sort is taking place completely based on the user's selection criteria. I think I used Swing Tables for the Java side, as they were quite the rage at the time.
Support for dumping data into Excel and Word - this was a killer feature. I was able to generate SOX and sizing reports on the fly with C#. Java? No such luck. I never did get it working quickly and properly.
I just dump the data into XML files. There's lots of viewers for those. You could even whip up an AJAX frontend to prettify it.
It's subjective whether this is more difficult. I started out a web developer - my first language was javascript - so to me it's pretty easy. The kind of thing I'd spend an afternoon or two on.
Ahhh - but see, that doesn't fit the requirement. The requirement is that I have to populate the Auditor's Excel and Word docs (as noted by the 'SOX'), often already laden with random auditor formatting. AJAX and all is cute, but if it doesn't fit the requirement of 'Must be an Excel document', then it doesn't fly.
It's possible now with the improvement of ODF and such that I could gin up something, but again. More time spent when a *much* easier approach exists.
You may be right here. I have, on many occasions, had to program reasonable size DB apps in both.
Java.makes.me.want.to.claw.my.eyes.out().NET may only be truly on windows, but it's actually not so bad to code in. I wrote a DB reporting and maint. app in C# in roughly 2 weeks, the previous version of which in Java took almost 2 months.
Major things, IME that made the difference? Crazy easy remote DB access (sure, neither are exactly rocket science, but.net was quicker and more flexible) Easy installs - this had me from the start. I wasn't writing a web app, but a desktop app. The C# one was a breeze, the Java one a major headache Attractive frontends - this will probably start yet another flamewar, but many of the java frontends are HIDEOUS Performance when doing large dataset manipulations - for example, determining which server had the least free space, or which one had the most obsolete users. These are fairly trivial sorting tasks, but the java version took probably twice as long and more memory (in my implementation, which may well have sucked to be frank). Support for dumping data into Excel and Word - this was a killer feature. I was able to generate SOX and sizing reports on the fly with C#. Java? No such luck. I never did get it working quickly and properly.
LOL - I had just foolishly *assumed* that by now Slashdot would get their stuff together.
And sadly no, I'm not that new. I started in 2000 or so, finally registered when it became too hard to track my posts:) I'm just naive enough to think they will eventually figure it out:D
Seriously. It's like Poe's law was invoked for this post.
I make a pretty good salary, but the work hours are crazy (I know I'm not the only one here doing MAJOR system work over Christmas), and the only real chances for advancement are into management (same as any other field).
While I don't agree with the 'bomb them before it's too late' theory, we agree about MAD.
That was the old way. The new way is limited high-speed tactical retaliation using standard munitions. Considering the threat posed to a small player (like NK) by even a single Carrier Group showing up in the Sea of Japan, I consider the new method to be very different than the old.
The threat of mass nuclear proliferation ('Global Thermo-Nuclear War' How about a nice game of Chess?) is less likely. The threat of nuclear war is probably far more likely, though... just because as you (and some random AC) pointed out, there are so many more people running around with nukes. World destroying? Probably not. Insanely dangerous? Yes.
I would expect that they tested it quite often. That's one of the biggest fears of the military mindset - what if one person blinks?
Just as a guess - they were probably far more worried that one man *wouldn't* launch when told to, rather than would try to launch solo. I think they usually included a massive fudge factor in their missile launch simulations, assuming that x percent of missiles wouldn't launch for whatever reason.
If the one man goes bad and tries to launch scenario had been even a remote issue, don't you think the KGB would have tried? They probably tried to get in those quite a few times (and I'm sure we tried to do the same). I doubt it was as simple as all that - for one thing, I suspect nobody truly knew which codes controlled the launch and which were bogus/invalid. That order probably had to come from remote.
You say it past tense... the fact remains, all sides are *still* prepared for all out war.
The difference now is that countries like North Korea and Iran think they'll somehow survive it. The long detente between the massive powers resulted in a long term truce and the wars were fought in little puppet skirmishes.
Now we face a world where there are a LOT of people capable of setting off a massive war, and there is no single large target. Just tons of scattered small targets.
These silos are dark because that was the 'old' way - the new way is faster, more efficient, and far more dangerous.
Irreplaceable Gods? Hell, I'd settle for them replacing my co-workers LESS often. The churn these positions (especially offshore) every 3 - 6 months, and the onshore layoffs and such every 6-12 months.
I went into consulting just to get some time at a company LOL
This is what I did - I was forced to move to a mgmt type role, and after determining that there was no way to get out of it, I quit and left.
The last thing you want as a technical person is to be forced to deal with stuff like that. Most real tech types are that way by choice, not requirement.
Sad because I find that on the whole Ubuntu's approach is rather heavy-handed, and their track record on 9.x is not very good.
I personally have several systems that don't work well at all with 9.x that worked beautifully under 8.x, and also work just fine with Debian and PC-BSD.
It's "linux on the desktop" almost the same way OSX is "BSD on the desktop" - (well, I'm exaggerating a bit) but the idea is the same. It's a very brittle distro that can be unfriendly to medium/advanced users. If you remove the choice and flexibility from Linux in order to produce a more controlled environment, you also remove some of the fundamental benefits.
I'm not really a linux on the desktop fan, however, so maybe I'm biased.
I think this is how it always starts... East India Trading Company anyone? I'm sure the only difference here is that the Somalian version is missing the Royal sanction, and there are no subjugated peoples to steal from... I mean trade with
Isn't this sort of the whole point of the wiki platform?
I'm not really into the "collaboration" stuff (never ended up in a situation where it applied - always had someone who 'owned' a doc and handled changes). I don't buy into the cloud for the same reason that I bought a microcomputer in the first place. I wanted my stuff to be my stuff. Not under the control of anyone but me. At work we have always used shared folders and such - but I can't be the only one where everyone has their own annotated version of their docs?
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly - I spent a year running a Y2K lab, constantly running through key dates so that programmers could test code. Stuff broke - stuff broke UGLY. It took months to get most of it working properly, and if the systems I was testing had broken?
People would have noticed. People would have sued.
Just add emacs :D
I kid I kid...
Wll, I'm so sorry I didn't have such an amazing god of Java around 10 years ago to do all this for me! It would have made *my* life easier!
On the other hand, I find people like you can talk the talk, but not walk the walk.
So why don't you gloat and feel happy, and I'll continue to point out that for *me* Java was a less efficient and productive language.
The whole point I was making was about subjective experience - I never claimed it was anything but my fault.
This is strange. I recall reading a lengthy article about how Java got list sorting to use roughly the same number of cycles as C. My guess is either you used the wrong algorithm, used a poorly optimized JVM, or had some other setting set wrong. If Java was consuming more memory, you could be losing all your performance to garbage collection. But my experience with Java, sorting lists several hundred thousand items long, was that it worked perfectly fine and was very quick.
Entirely possible. I may at some point go back and review it, but essentially I had a huge local table (20,000 databases long, up to 20 rows wide) that was sortable by the user clicking on a column header. Therefore the sort is taking place completely based on the user's selection criteria. I think I used Swing Tables for the Java side, as they were quite the rage at the time.
Support for dumping data into Excel and Word - this was a killer feature. I was able to generate SOX and sizing reports on the fly with C#. Java? No such luck. I never did get it working quickly and properly.
I just dump the data into XML files. There's lots of viewers for those. You could even whip up an AJAX frontend to prettify it.
It's subjective whether this is more difficult. I started out a web developer - my first language was javascript - so to me it's pretty easy. The kind of thing I'd spend an afternoon or two on.
Ahhh - but see, that doesn't fit the requirement. The requirement is that I have to populate the Auditor's Excel and Word docs (as noted by the 'SOX'), often already laden with random auditor formatting. AJAX and all is cute, but if it doesn't fit the requirement of 'Must be an Excel document', then it doesn't fly.
It's possible now with the improvement of ODF and such that I could gin up something, but again. More time spent when a *much* easier approach exists.
Sorry, I think DEC has that patent already... so I guess HP owns it now :D
"Patent for a method of developing innovations that result in bankruptcy"
You may be right here. I have, on many occasions, had to program reasonable size DB apps in both.
Java.makes.me.want.to.claw.my.eyes.out() .NET may only be truly on windows, but it's actually not so bad to code in. I wrote a DB reporting and maint. app in C# in roughly 2 weeks, the previous version of which in Java took almost 2 months.
Major things, IME that made the difference? .net was quicker and more flexible)
Crazy easy remote DB access (sure, neither are exactly rocket science, but
Easy installs - this had me from the start. I wasn't writing a web app, but a desktop app. The C# one was a breeze, the Java one a major headache
Attractive frontends - this will probably start yet another flamewar, but many of the java frontends are HIDEOUS
Performance when doing large dataset manipulations - for example, determining which server had the least free space, or which one had the most obsolete users. These are fairly trivial sorting tasks, but the java version took probably twice as long and more memory (in my implementation, which may well have sucked to be frank).
Support for dumping data into Excel and Word - this was a killer feature. I was able to generate SOX and sizing reports on the fly with C#. Java? No such luck. I never did get it working quickly and properly.
LOL - I had just foolishly *assumed* that by now Slashdot would get their stuff together.
And sadly no, I'm not that new. I started in 2000 or so, finally registered when it became too hard to track my posts :) I'm just naive enough to think they will eventually figure it out :D
What are they up to now, 7 digits?
Seriously. It's like Poe's law was invoked for this post.
I make a pretty good salary, but the work hours are crazy (I know I'm not the only one here doing MAJOR system work over Christmas), and the only real chances for advancement are into management (same as any other field).
Why a Debian logo instead of the Ubuntu logo?
While I don't agree with the 'bomb them before it's too late' theory, we agree about MAD.
That was the old way. The new way is limited high-speed tactical retaliation using standard munitions. Considering the threat posed to a small player (like NK) by even a single Carrier Group showing up in the Sea of Japan, I consider the new method to be very different than the old.
The threat of mass nuclear proliferation ('Global Thermo-Nuclear War' How about a nice game of Chess?) is less likely. The threat of nuclear war is probably far more likely, though... just because as you (and some random AC) pointed out, there are so many more people running around with nukes. World destroying? Probably not. Insanely dangerous? Yes.
I would expect that they tested it quite often. That's one of the biggest fears of the military mindset - what if one person blinks?
Just as a guess - they were probably far more worried that one man *wouldn't* launch when told to, rather than would try to launch solo. I think they usually included a massive fudge factor in their missile launch simulations, assuming that x percent of missiles wouldn't launch for whatever reason.
If the one man goes bad and tries to launch scenario had been even a remote issue, don't you think the KGB would have tried? They probably tried to get in those quite a few times (and I'm sure we tried to do the same). I doubt it was as simple as all that - for one thing, I suspect nobody truly knew which codes controlled the launch and which were bogus/invalid. That order probably had to come from remote.
You say it past tense... the fact remains, all sides are *still* prepared for all out war.
The difference now is that countries like North Korea and Iran think they'll somehow survive it. The long detente between the massive powers resulted in a long term truce and the wars were fought in little puppet skirmishes.
Now we face a world where there are a LOT of people capable of setting off a massive war, and there is no single large target. Just tons of scattered small targets.
These silos are dark because that was the 'old' way - the new way is faster, more efficient, and far more dangerous.
Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead.
Benjamin Franklin
That is a very good point he has there...
Irreplaceable Gods? Hell, I'd settle for them replacing my co-workers LESS often. The churn these positions (especially offshore) every 3 - 6 months, and the onshore layoffs and such every 6-12 months.
I went into consulting just to get some time at a company LOL
This is what I did - I was forced to move to a mgmt type role, and after determining that there was no way to get out of it, I quit and left.
The last thing you want as a technical person is to be forced to deal with stuff like that. Most real tech types are that way by choice, not requirement.
Yeah, well, it wasn't as sensation that way.
Sad because I find that on the whole Ubuntu's approach is rather heavy-handed, and their track record on 9.x is not very good.
I personally have several systems that don't work well at all with 9.x that worked beautifully under 8.x, and also work just fine with Debian and PC-BSD.
It's "linux on the desktop" almost the same way OSX is "BSD on the desktop" - (well, I'm exaggerating a bit) but the idea is the same. It's a very brittle distro that can be unfriendly to medium/advanced users. If you remove the choice and flexibility from Linux in order to produce a more controlled environment, you also remove some of the fundamental benefits.
I'm not really a linux on the desktop fan, however, so maybe I'm biased.
In any case, it's still far better than Fedora :D
Not for "most distros", no :D
Most installed desktops? Possibly - and if so, that's kinda sad.
Isn't Mandriva a for-cost linux? I don't quite understand their model, so I usually ignore them.
Well, not all:
http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090729
Debian is on a 2 year cycle
http://news.opensuse.org/2009/03/05/112-roadmap-and-fixed-release-cycle-for-opensuse/
Suse 8 months
I think Ubuntu and Fedora go for the 6 month, but I doubt 'most' go for 6 mos. I think the average is to attempt an annual release.
And the Kennedys - lest we forget
I think this is how it always starts... East India Trading Company anyone? I'm sure the only difference here is that the Somalian version is missing the Royal sanction, and there are no subjugated peoples to steal from... I mean trade with
Funny, Debian dims my laptop screen just fine. What on earth are you doing with it?
Here's even an article on disabling auto-dim: http://www.brighthub.com/computing/linux/blog/archive/2009/05/01/adjust-or-turn-off-inactivity-screen-dimming-in-ubuntu.aspx
So - I'm going to go with "have you tried"?
Certainly - but I believe the point was "not trusting google with the docs" and "free and open alternatives"
Hence Sharepoint (point 1) and Wiki (point 2)
Wiki?
Isn't this sort of the whole point of the wiki platform?
I'm not really into the "collaboration" stuff (never ended up in a situation where it applied - always had someone who 'owned' a doc and handled changes).
I don't buy into the cloud for the same reason that I bought a microcomputer in the first place. I wanted my stuff to be my stuff. Not under the control of anyone but me. At work we have always used shared folders and such - but I can't be the only one where everyone has their own annotated version of their docs?