Ruby sounds really interesting, but after all the language is just one aspect of development.
Well, not exactly. Ruby is Rails. Most frameworks require a language, a templating engine and other plumbing to make it all work. Ruby on Rails is all Ruby. Even the templating are Ruby tags using ERb. You don't need to learn a "simple" templating language (which confuse web designers most of the time). There's no need to cheat by stuffing code in places where it shouldn't be (aka seperating the HTML from the business logic), because it's just as easy to put it where it's supposed to be.
Ruby on Rails is still very, very new. All the hype can lead one to think it's a replacement for everything - it's not. Java is a mature platform, and should be used for more critical scenarios. But Java was where Ruby on Rails is. And as it continues to mature, it will only become more viable in those situations where mature frameworks are required.
Besides, Rails is fun. And programming that's fun is more productive than programming that's work.
A "beta" book, in PDF form, with typographical and technical errors, will probably be the "definitive book" about a brand-new framework? What a statement...
It's been written by Dave Thomas who pretty much helped bring Ruby from Japan into the rest of the English speaking world, and DHH the guy who wrote Rails. It really doesn't matter if it is the best book in the future or not, only time will tell. Having said that, I'll stick by my statement.
Don't get me wrong - I haven't had much time to play with Rails, and as a web developer, I probably should, in order to keep my skills fresh. I may even like it. But this fervent, sycophantic praise - spurred on by the blogerati (flamesuit enabled) - seems premature, especially when there are many capable web application frameworks out there. In the future, it might even seem silly.
Yep, you're right, tomrrow I might be bright red with embarassment over my enthusiasm. Frankly, I don't really care. I've been gushing about Rails for awhile simply because I did perl, PHP, and Python and was frustrated by all of them. I'm sure there will be barbs in Ruby on Rails too (there always is). But I haven't had this much fun programming in over 20 years. Programming is fun again - that's why I really like Rails, and the book continues to make it even more fun.
This is so awesome......and any Beta mindfart about it is like ten times ten Ajax orgasms! (And now for the real thing watch this post being modded +10 Insightfull)
I love how on Slashdot if you show any enthusiasm you're a mindless lemming, and if you're overly critical about anything (sans Microsoft) you're a biased ignoramus.
FTA: Yet regardless of the mutual admiration, some tense moments were inevitable during the confrontation.
Microsoft developers, for instance, were visibly uncomfortable when Moore demonstrated Metasploit--a tool that system administrators can use to test the reliability of their systems to intrusion. But Metasploit also includes a fair number of exploits, as well as tools that can be used to develop new types of attacks.
"You had these developers saying, 'Why are you giving the world these tools that make it so easy to do exploitation?'" Kaminsky said. They calmed down, he said, once the researchers were able to state their case.
"We do regression testing in the real world of software development," Kaminsky said. "If we say, 'This thing isn't going to break,' then we need to test that. What these tools give is the ability to do this kind of testing, to be able to say not just, 'We did the best we could,' but 'We tried stuff and nothing worked.'"
Nevertheless, he understands why not all Microsoft developers were satisfied with the explanation.
Wow. This is great (and about time too). What really seems clear to me from all this is the problem with Microsofties is the same problem a lot of slashdot readers suffer from: hubris.
Open Source software is not bulletproof. It suffers from security defects as well. The big difference, however, is we're up front and honest about it. Microsoft can't afford to be that way, as they rely on customer confidence and their monopoly to stay in business.
Microsoft seems to be understanding that their real problem in improving security is people, not so much the technology. By letting the "bad guys" knock the bricks down in front of the programmers who build the stuff, it ouggta sink in pretty deep.
Fix the attitude among the developers and the technical stuff will probably follow. Too bad a lot of slashdotters aren't able to experience the same thing.
I believe that not grokking MVC detracts from the value of your review, particularly with respect to your opinion of the architecture of Rails. Without understanding MVC, you can have no understanding of the design decisions they made, and as such, no qualified understanding of the architecture itself.
Yep, I admit fully I'm probably not qualified as others to review the book. But I can only give my opinion, and for a newbie who's played with other architectures and run into a big pile of messy code after awhile, I can say I haven't experienced this with Rails. So while I might not understand exactly why Rails helps keep things neat and tidy, I can say what I personally have experienced. Or another way, I can't tell you why Mozart was a musical genius, all I know is I recognize that he is based on what I've heard.
If it helps, let me change my statement: In short, Rails is a really, really good architecture 'cause it helps me keep develop code faster and cleaner than anything else I've used, and Agile Web Development with Ruby on Rails is a great book because even newbies can understand it.
Ruby on Rails is astounding. Using it is like watching a kung-fu movie, where a dozen bad-ass frameworks prepare to beat up the little newcomer only to be handed their asses in a variety of imaginative ways. I've got David Heinemeier Hanson giving a session, tutorial, and keynote. That's how much I love "convention over configuration" and the other philosophies behind Rails. Rails shows us a very interesting future for web applications, and is a great example of innovation from within the open source community.
I've been using a keyboard for over 24 years, and have never learned to type properly. Recently slashdot had an article about Das Keyboard where the keycaps were all blank.
I think the keyboard is way overpriced, but it gave me the idea of cutting up some labels and putting them over a couple of keys to force myself not to look at the keys. After a couple of days I ended up blanking all the keys on my keyboard. What surprised me was I hit the same keys with different fingers depending what words I'm typing. My accuracy tanked immediately, but after spending a short time with a typing tutor my typing is back up to speed, and a lot more comfortable.
I wonder now if my brain can learn more than one layout? The most interesting read I've seen about typing is this guy who developed the Arensito layout, as well as his article on Optimal Keyboard Layout. Maybe it's possible to know a layout for typing text fast (eg. DVORAK), a layout for most computers (eg. QWERTY), and a layout for programming (eg. ARENSITO or MYOWN:-) )
I've seen this technology for years. It's called the "Microsoft Product Line".
For example, here's what Microsoft sees: "Windows XP Home Edition sets a new standard for performance and reliability. If you demand the most from your operating system, this version of Windows was designed for you"
And here's what I see: "A shoddy piece of crap that is vulnerable to viruses and malware. Unable to extract the kind of reliability and flexibility that Debian Linux can".
See? Same thing's on the screen, but we see two totally different things.
I've got the Rails book, and it's amazing how many people have contributed errata and feedback (which by the way was quickly written and deployed with Ruby on Rails, the subject of the book). This might be the perfect way for authors to polish their books to a mirror shine before printing, especially if the content is something readers are eager for.
It could also be a way publishers can gauge the success of a book. No public feedback, not likely the book will sell well. Enthusiastic readers can participate in something they think is worthwhile, which of course can create favourable word of mouth.
Either way, the idea of an errataWiki and forum-like discussion on each section of a book is an interesting idea, and one that will be explored by other authors.
FTA: I recently asked Linus Torvalds for his thoughts...
Torvalds: Linux has a much wider audience, in many ways. That ranges from supporting much wider hardware (both in the driver sense and in the architecture sense) to actual uses.
Wow. Amazing. Linus has managed to speak to another human being in paranthesis. What happened here, was he talking one minute verbally and then transmitted his thoughts to the interviewer through some Jedi'ish mind trick?
I knew Torvalds had to be an alien. I just knew it.
It will operate autonomously under control of on-board computers, with no ground control.
Sounds great! Put me on the list, with one provision: if an announcement is made that "Microsoft will partner with Blue Origin to provide software" then forget it, I'm not goin'
Get the book
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I first heard of Ruby on Rails here on Slashdot. Although Rails is dead simple once you get it, getting to the "ah ha" point is a bit of a steep climb.
If you want to learn Ajax in Rails, the best thing I've read has been Dave Thomas' new book "Agile Web Development with Ruby on Rails". The author of Ruby on Rails itself, David Heinemeier Hansson, is also a co-author. Great book, absolutely fantastic web development framework.
It's been a common belief that computer games are what really drive the industry. Why else do people drop $2000.00 to replace their old computer which is only a few years old? Why else do AMD and Intel give their latest hardware months in advance of public release to the top game producers? They know people will spend the cash to play the latest game titles, not so they can run Word or Outlook faster (that's just a side benefit).
Make no mistake, Linux on the PS3 is a big deal. It will bring Linux into the mainstream where people can really get their hands on a Linux-based device. When people begin to associate Linux with a cool, sleek game machine that puts out the best graphics of any device, it will be much easier for users and developers to want the same thing on their computers.
But will it be enough to unseat Microsoft and dominate the Desktop landscape? Maybe. I think it's more likely Linux will be part of "the next big thing" whatever that might be. Some sort of cellphone, game console, High-Def recorder. Maybe Linux will morph the landscape into solid-state, computers that's just a flat panel, a keyboard and mouse, with the hard drive being just USB memory sticks. Or maybe PS3-like devices and a Plasma high-def big screen TV's. Or maybe something else.
I don't know, but I think I hear a lot of commotion down in Redmond, Washington.
Sometimes One Feature is all it takes
on
A Decade of PHP
·
· Score: 1
I really think PHP's success is about one thing: cut and paste. When I didn't know squat about creating dynamic web sites, it was PHP that was the easiest to learn. All I had to do was cut and paste someone else's script into my HTML and voila! Also the installation, configuration, and documentation are excellent.
But most PHP applications I've developed usually start simple but grow into a tangled mess of code. I've tried to seperate my programming logic using templating systems, but it's just so much easier to slap in code into HTML that I cheat a lot.
I've been converted to Ruby on Rails because it's faster and easier to write clean, maintainable code. But PHP got me into web programming, and is still what I recommend to people who want to start creating dynamic websites.
FTA: The US authorities said the cost of tracking him down and correcting the alleged problems was more than £570,000.
Okay, what he did was wrong and if he's guilty he should be jailed. But why is correcting problems in the software his fault? People pay good money to find faults in their computer's security. Are security consultants who find flaws in commercial software causing billions in damage?
As for him being "world's biggest computer hacker" that title belongs to Richard Stallman and/or Linus Torvalds. Their hacks are causing hundreds of billions of dollars of lost revenue to commercial software companies.
Why? I've run 2000 and XP (with eye candy turned off obviously) on machines with not much more cpu power than those. As long as you have enough ram everything should be ok.
Not with all the latest patches, fixes, anti-virus, anti-spam, office suite and other applications you haven't. People in an office environment are not patient when it comes to computing.
FTA: "The original plan for Longhorn was to build lots of components on top of the next version of the.Net Framework," according to one of our developer sources, who requested anonymity. "But given how late (.Net Framework 2.0) is, and how new it would be (Microsoft Chairman) Bill Gates realized it would be foolish to build important pieces of Longhorn on top of.Net."
So let me get this straight: it's foolish for Bill Gates to build important pieces on.Net, but it's smart for eveyone else?
Let's face it, Microsoft Windows is beginning to buckle under the weight of their own code. I don't think Longhorn will be shipped any earlier than late 2007 or early 2008. If they release Longhorn now, they will orphan the OS: Too big to be run on today's hardware, too incompatible with many critical applications, and too few business reasons to make the switch.
Goffe said Microsoft will continue to recommend that the best way to get more out of any operating system is to replace computers when they get old. That's funny, my customers and I are always trying to get more out of our computers, not the other way around.
When a business begins to ignore the needs of their customer, the customer needs to ignore that business.
FTA: "Just by visiting a Web site, (if) suddenly an executable is created on your machine outside the Internet Explorer folder, it is an exploit with no false positive -- it's that simple," Yi-Ming Wang, senior researcher with Microsoft Research, said during a presentation at the IEEE Security and Privacy conference in Oakland last week.
With all the hoopla a couple years ago about how Microsoft is serious about security, I had ASSUMED they were doing this! The Honeynet project is coming up on 6 years, so it's not as if Redmond didn't see others doing this.
Really, for a multi-billion dollar company, it's inexcusable that they have not been running a honeynet with their product. Oh well, better late than never.
It's been tried and failed many times before
on
Out Of The XBox
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
Is Microsoft about to do in the living room with the Xbox 360 what it did in the office with Windows?
No
Linux is killing Microsoft indirectly
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 1
FTA: "In fall 2003, Microsoft briefly considered buying Google, only to realize that even if Brin, Page, and their board could have been persuaded to sell--which seemed unlikely--Microsoft would have been left to explain to the world why it was now running a search engine built entirely on Linux instead of Windows."
Wow, Gates hates Linux so much he won't touch a company that's using it. Microsoft didn't get into the search game because it was a money-loser. So Google grew into one of the most recognized brand names in the world, built the market into THE money maker for the future, and Superman(Microsoft) can touch Google because they're wearing Kryptonite(Linux).
Microsoft needs to pull out all the stops to win this one. It really seems too little too late, but maybe they'll use the patent system to stop them.
FTA: For six months the team even bought its own servers. Gaining clearance to run and monitor the project on the corporate server farm would have been too time-consuming, Payne's team felt--not to mention the strain an ambitious search offering would put on the systems. (Google is widely estimated to run 250,000 servers to support its search.) The technology they eventually unveiled used a heavily modified version of the Windows server operating system. All its other components were of their own design, run with a lot of software they had written themselves.
I know Microsoft can have all the free copies of Windows it wants, but wouldn't it make more sense for them to switch to Linux instead of Windows? Google has over a 1/4 million servers - A Quarter Million! - and anyone of those cheap machines can die and be replaced quickly. Why? Because they've developed their own specialized database, their own file system and ultimately their own clustering system. Windows is just too big of a pig to be be made lean enough to run and develop software fast enough. There are enough Linux developers now who know the OS backwards and forwards to follow in Google's footsteps then there are Windows OS experts (they're too busy trying to get Longtooth out the door).
The chickens are coming home to roost: Microsoft's big problem in competing with Google is their blind devotion to using their own products.
Slashdot Mirror
Next question, please...
Ruby on Rails is still very, very new. All the hype can lead one to think it's a replacement for everything - it's not. Java is a mature platform, and should be used for more critical scenarios. But Java was where Ruby on Rails is. And as it continues to mature, it will only become more viable in those situations where mature frameworks are required.
Besides, Rails is fun. And programming that's fun is more productive than programming that's work.
Yep, you're right, tomrrow I might be bright red with embarassment over my enthusiasm. Frankly, I don't really care. I've been gushing about Rails for awhile simply because I did perl, PHP, and Python and was frustrated by all of them. I'm sure there will be barbs in Ruby on Rails too (there always is). But I haven't had this much fun programming in over 20 years. Programming is fun again - that's why I really like Rails, and the book continues to make it even more fun.
Open Source software is not bulletproof. It suffers from security defects as well. The big difference, however, is we're up front and honest about it. Microsoft can't afford to be that way, as they rely on customer confidence and their monopoly to stay in business.
Microsoft seems to be understanding that their real problem in improving security is people, not so much the technology. By letting the "bad guys" knock the bricks down in front of the programmers who build the stuff, it ouggta sink in pretty deep.
Fix the attitude among the developers and the technical stuff will probably follow. Too bad a lot of slashdotters aren't able to experience the same thing.
If it helps, let me change my statement: In short, Rails is a really, really good architecture 'cause it helps me keep develop code faster and cleaner than anything else I've used, and Agile Web Development with Ruby on Rails is a great book because even newbies can understand it.
So since I readily admit my opinion isn't a qualified one, how about something from O'Reilly instead:
I've been using a keyboard for over 24 years, and have never learned to type properly. Recently slashdot had an article about Das Keyboard where the keycaps were all blank.
I think the keyboard is way overpriced, but it gave me the idea of cutting up some labels and putting them over a couple of keys to force myself not to look at the keys. After a couple of days I ended up blanking all the keys on my keyboard. What surprised me was I hit the same keys with different fingers depending what words I'm typing. My accuracy tanked immediately, but after spending a short time with a typing tutor my typing is back up to speed, and a lot more comfortable.
I wonder now if my brain can learn more than one layout? The most interesting read I've seen about typing is this guy who developed the Arensito layout, as well as his article on Optimal Keyboard Layout. Maybe it's possible to know a layout for typing text fast (eg. DVORAK), a layout for most computers (eg. QWERTY), and a layout for programming (eg. ARENSITO or MYOWN:-) )
I've seen this technology for years. It's called the "Microsoft Product Line".
For example, here's what Microsoft sees:
"Windows XP Home Edition sets a new standard for performance and reliability. If you demand the most from your operating system, this version of Windows was designed for you"
And here's what I see:
"A shoddy piece of crap that is vulnerable to viruses and malware. Unable to extract the kind of reliability and flexibility that Debian Linux can".
See? Same thing's on the screen, but we see two totally different things.
I've got the Rails book, and it's amazing how many people have contributed errata and feedback (which by the way was quickly written and deployed with Ruby on Rails, the subject of the book). This might be the perfect way for authors to polish their books to a mirror shine before printing, especially if the content is something readers are eager for.
It could also be a way publishers can gauge the success of a book. No public feedback, not likely the book will sell well. Enthusiastic readers can participate in something they think is worthwhile, which of course can create favourable word of mouth.
Either way, the idea of an errataWiki and forum-like discussion on each section of a book is an interesting idea, and one that will be explored by other authors.
Wow. Amazing. Linus has managed to speak to another human being in paranthesis. What happened here, was he talking one minute verbally and then transmitted his thoughts to the interviewer through some Jedi'ish mind trick?
I knew Torvalds had to be an alien. I just knew it.
I first heard of Ruby on Rails here on Slashdot. Although Rails is dead simple once you get it, getting to the "ah ha" point is a bit of a steep climb.
If you want to learn Ajax in Rails, the best thing I've read has been Dave Thomas' new book "Agile Web Development with Ruby on Rails". The author of Ruby on Rails itself, David Heinemeier Hansson, is also a co-author. Great book, absolutely fantastic web development framework.
It's been a common belief that computer games are what really drive the industry. Why else do people drop $2000.00 to replace their old computer which is only a few years old? Why else do AMD and Intel give their latest hardware months in advance of public release to the top game producers? They know people will spend the cash to play the latest game titles, not so they can run Word or Outlook faster (that's just a side benefit).
Make no mistake, Linux on the PS3 is a big deal. It will bring Linux into the mainstream where people can really get their hands on a Linux-based device. When people begin to associate Linux with a cool, sleek game machine that puts out the best graphics of any device, it will be much easier for users and developers to want the same thing on their computers.
But will it be enough to unseat Microsoft and dominate the Desktop landscape? Maybe. I think it's more likely Linux will be part of "the next big thing" whatever that might be. Some sort of cellphone, game console, High-Def recorder. Maybe Linux will morph the landscape into solid-state, computers that's just a flat panel, a keyboard and mouse, with the hard drive being just USB memory sticks. Or maybe PS3-like devices and a Plasma high-def big screen TV's. Or maybe something else.
I don't know, but I think I hear a lot of commotion down in Redmond, Washington.
I really think PHP's success is about one thing: cut and paste. When I didn't know squat about creating dynamic web sites, it was PHP that was the easiest to learn. All I had to do was cut and paste someone else's script into my HTML and voila! Also the installation, configuration, and documentation are excellent.
But most PHP applications I've developed usually start simple but grow into a tangled mess of code. I've tried to seperate my programming logic using templating systems, but it's just so much easier to slap in code into HTML that I cheat a lot.
I've been converted to Ruby on Rails because it's faster and easier to write clean, maintainable code. But PHP got me into web programming, and is still what I recommend to people who want to start creating dynamic websites.
I don't see how this will affect Samba. They've never had access to how SMB/CIFS works in the past, how will not having access to it now affect them?
If anything it shows how strong Linux & F/OSS is. I'd say it's more of a compliment rather than an insult.
As for him being "world's biggest computer hacker" that title belongs to Richard Stallman and/or Linus Torvalds. Their hacks are causing hundreds of billions of dollars of lost revenue to commercial software companies.
Not with all the latest patches, fixes, anti-virus, anti-spam, office suite and other applications you haven't. People in an office environment are not patient when it comes to computing.
Well, running Windows is not an option unless you're going to replace those machines.
I'd say Windows terminal services with a linux client connecting to them. That would cause the least amount of disruption.
So let me get this straight: it's foolish for Bill Gates to build important pieces on
Let's face it, Microsoft Windows is beginning to buckle under the weight of their own code. I don't think Longhorn will be shipped any earlier than late 2007 or early 2008. If they release Longhorn now, they will orphan the OS: Too big to be run on today's hardware, too incompatible with many critical applications, and too few business reasons to make the switch.
Goffe said Microsoft will continue to recommend that the best way to get more out of any operating system is to replace computers when they get old.
That's funny, my customers and I are always trying to get more out of our computers, not the other way around.
When a business begins to ignore the needs of their customer, the customer needs to ignore that business.
FTA: "Just by visiting a Web site, (if) suddenly an executable is created on your machine outside the Internet Explorer folder, it is an exploit with no false positive -- it's that simple," Yi-Ming Wang, senior researcher with Microsoft Research, said during a presentation at the IEEE Security and Privacy conference in Oakland last week.
With all the hoopla a couple years ago about how Microsoft is serious about security, I had ASSUMED they were doing this! The Honeynet project is coming up on 6 years, so it's not as if Redmond didn't see others doing this.
Really, for a multi-billion dollar company, it's inexcusable that they have not been running a honeynet with their product. Oh well, better late than never.
Is Microsoft about to do in the living room with the Xbox 360 what it did in the office with Windows?
No
FTA: "In fall 2003, Microsoft briefly considered buying Google, only to realize that even if Brin, Page, and their board could have been persuaded to sell--which seemed unlikely--Microsoft would have been left to explain to the world why it was now running a search engine built entirely on Linux instead of Windows."
Wow, Gates hates Linux so much he won't touch a company that's using it. Microsoft didn't get into the search game because it was a money-loser. So Google grew into one of the most recognized brand names in the world, built the market into THE money maker for the future, and Superman(Microsoft) can touch Google because they're wearing Kryptonite(Linux).
Microsoft needs to pull out all the stops to win this one. It really seems too little too late, but maybe they'll use the patent system to stop them.
FTA: For six months the team even bought its own servers. Gaining clearance to run and monitor the project on the corporate server farm would have been too time-consuming, Payne's team felt--not to mention the strain an ambitious search offering would put on the systems. (Google is widely estimated to run 250,000 servers to support its search.) The technology they eventually unveiled used a heavily modified version of the Windows server operating system. All its other components were of their own design, run with a lot of software they had written themselves.
I know Microsoft can have all the free copies of Windows it wants, but wouldn't it make more sense for them to switch to Linux instead of Windows? Google has over a 1/4 million servers - A Quarter Million! - and anyone of those cheap machines can die and be replaced quickly. Why? Because they've developed their own specialized database, their own file system and ultimately their own clustering system. Windows is just too big of a pig to be be made lean enough to run and develop software fast enough. There are enough Linux developers now who know the OS backwards and forwards to follow in Google's footsteps then there are Windows OS experts (they're too busy trying to get Longtooth out the door).
The chickens are coming home to roost: Microsoft's big problem in competing with Google is their blind devotion to using their own products.