If you're an IT professional in any fashion and you cannot touch type it tells me that you've probably neglected other aspects of your profession, and I usually don't want to have to find out what that is. It's going to cost me somehow. You can't convince me that with two people with the same skills otherwise, the touch typer won't be more efficient and more focused on what he's doing. If you have to look at the keyboard you're not thinking about what else you should be focused on.
You ignore the pace of the business and consumer world. Personal spending and corporations can't evolve fast enough to absorb technology as fast as it becomes viable. That's why we're still running payroll on a mainframe using cobol. It's why PC's are still built on the same basic motherboard design we've seen for about 20 years. Things have changed, but not really.
Physical products - cars, desks, pacemakers, light bulbs, you name it - are produced from engineering drawings that specify exact dimensions, materials, tolerances. They are manufactured on machines that themselves have been engineered to great precision.
Until software can be specified with such a degree of precision, until there is a software 'engineering diagram' that leaves nothing to be misinterpreted or misunderstood the developer will be left to his own machinations, and the industry will be left to the capabilities of its practicioners.
As it stands, no one can tell the developer just exactly what they wish to have built, no developer can be sure they've met the full set of true (not the stated) requirements.
Better languages, better software tools, better developer training will only do so much. It must eventually come down to the software 'Engineering Diagram' that is precise, accurate, and that ensures that the measure of correctness is unmistakeable.
You'd get the work done within the parameters that they've made you live in. If that's not possible, that's their problem, not yours. If they won't recognize that and you're letting them get away with it, you're the fool.
If I'm your manager and you've implemented monitoring or other procedures in a fashion that is not according to my design or policy you're at risk to be fired or otherwise reigned in. You do it my way or I'll find someone who will. I won't pay the price when you leave for having things going unmonitored or unmaintained because you've taken it with you. If you've done something other than what's been given you to do you've either assumed that what we've designed is wrong or we've missed requirements. Either situation needs corrected at first opportunity.
NONE of these ideas EVER have produced ANY meaningful metrics.
I have looked and NEVER ONCE found any list of metrics by which the efficiency or effectiveness of any of these methods has been evaluated. It's all blowing smoke.
What an arrogant, judgemental @ss you are. You think there can be no reason to keep a job that might outweigh your feelings toward an employer? Say maybe the need to continue receiving a paycheck? Maybe the lack of viable employment alternatives? Perhaps a desire to stay long enough to vest a retirement contribution?
It's simple for a blowhard like you to say, "You should quit. They're scum." It's not so easy to execute it when you perhaps have financial or family obligations that have to be managed.
When viewed from a manufacturing perspective, IT is emerging into the assembly line model all over again. In the early days of manufacturing someone wanetd somtething built they went to a master craftsman. The craftsman had all the knowledge of how to build and all the tools. They knew how to get and use raw materials.
When the revolution started, materials were easy to get and they had a standard degree of quality. That is where the OS and programming languages are today. That's where database systems and intefaces are. Anyone can get to those resoruces and everyone can know how they will behave.
The industrial revolution brought about standards for design, and engineers could be taught the rules to design without them ever having to have the skills to build anything. Those designs were very complete, very precise, and delivered in standard forms that could be impelmented by anyone with the proper tools.
Along with the advanced designs, machine tools evolved that had the precision to replicate a design and to produce quality items from any proper design. Machining and assembly became commodity items.
With these two advancements, the master craftsman no longer had a place in the manufacturing cycle. He was supplanted by engineering and more advanced tools that brought manufacturing to the masses.
This is the model with software, but we're not there with software yet. And that is why outsourcing is a struggle today. Outsourcing assums that coding is a commodity skill that can produce a quality product from a proper design. For htat to be so, the designs of software must be as rigorous and systematic, complete and accurate and precise, as for any manufactured item. It simply isn't so.
Personally, I think we're there with the resources, but not hte tools and the design. Computers and the OS and the databse are adequate. It's the design and the tooling that have FAR too much variance. And until the industry has evolved to that point, in say another 50 years or so, it'll never be an assembly line, no matter how much sense it may make to the business world to try to make it so.
Like everything else, it comes down to risk. MOst often, all you can see is one end of a cable at a time, and you can't see how intertwined it may be with all those other calbes. To get it out you have to yank on it, which risks putting strain on everything else in there. And if one overzealous zip tie guy slapped one on in the middle there's no chance to get it by itself. The whole bundle will come out.
You can restart a web server. You can add anotehr if you're seeing a slowdown. You can bounce a server itself hen it's acting badly. You can get more servers when you need it. These are transient components of an enterprise that can be switched on, switched out, or added to without changing the state of your business.
Data IS the business. It's where you've been, where you are, and the best guide for where you need to be. It's what you've been paid for, what you need to be paid for, and who is going to pay you for it. It's the answer to every customer's questions. You tell them, "Sorry, my database shredded your account. Can you remind me what we sold you and if you paid for it?" when you switched to something less than Oracle.
Actually, the bits about Tom are key to understanding Middle Earth, Gandalf and the otehr wizards, and in fact the entire struggle. It's not clear, but Tom and Gandalf and the wizards are connected at a higher level than is obvious.
Personally, I think dropping Saruman is rather appropriate.
Why don't you go to the Novell site and look at the SEC filings. You'll see exactly where there money comes from and where it goes. Just like any publicly held company, they gotta tell the public.
No sense speculating. Just do the research. From teh 2002 filing:
" We managed to maintain large network site-license revenue at $681 million, approximately flat to fiscal 2001"
"Novell's revenue, including the addition of revenue from recent acquisitions, was up eight percent to $1.13 billion, and cash flow from operations during the year was a positive $51 million. "
"Cash and short term investments on our balance sheet stood at $636 million at the end of fiscal 2002. Novell had no debt, and total assets were at $1.7 billion."
From the 10G for 4/2003
NOVELL, INC. CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS April 30, 2003 October 31, 2002 In thousands, except share and per share data (Unaudited) Assets Current assets: Cash and short-term investments $ 626,397 $ 635,858 Receivables (less allowances of $32,677 - April 30, 2003 and $39,676 - October 31, 2002) 183,672 214,827 Prepaid expenses 32,293 24,077 Deferred income taxes 19,420 21,204 Other current assets 25,166 23,572 Total current assets 886,948 919,538 Property, plant and equipment, net 353,183 369,189 Goodwill 180,579 179,534 Intangible assets 30,092 36,351 Long-term investments 55,603 73,452 Deferred income taxes 83,791 74,323 Other assets 12,385 12,678 Total assets $ 1,602,581 $ 1,665,065 Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity Current liabilities: Accounts payable $ 61,007 $ 57,241 Accrued compensation 78,498 87,778 Other accrued liabilities 124,337 134,850 Income taxes payable 28,764 36,294 Deferred revenue 267,546 275,344 Total current liabilities 560,152 591,507 Minority interests 7,841 8,016 Stockholders' equity: Common stock, par value $.10 per share: Authorized - 600,000,000 shares; Issued -371,295,559 shares-April 30, 2003, 367,537,926 shares-October 31, 2002 37,130 36,753 Preferred stock, par value $.10 per share; Authorized - 500,000 shares, Issued - 0 shares -- -- Additional paid-in capital 303,760 297,139 Retained earnings 698,164 738,663 Accumulated other comprehensive income 651 57 Other (5,117) (7,070) Total stockholders' equity 1,034,588 1,065,542 Total liabilities and stockholders' equity $ 1,602,581 $ 1,665,065
There will always be theft, simply because even though I have mine, you have one to, and we can both get more free, if I can have more with you having none, I win.
Theft isn't entirely about scarcity, it's about competition and jealousy and all sorts of other things.
I've been on four projects that were "textbook EJB" projects. In the end they all abandoned EJB, after numerous failures along the way, for other more intuitive and less costly options.
EJB ranks right up there with 'New Coke' in my book.
I've thought about using the vacuum unit from a woodworking dust reclamation system to provide airflow to remove hot air from my several cases. It would involve attaching a 2.5" plastic tube to each case and through a wall to the unit. I'm not sure what type of airflow those things generate, but it's enough to suck the sawdust from several woodworking implements at once.
Why a new name when it does the same thing that's been going on over networks for the last 20 years? This is nothing more than another version of distributed object technology. Just like DCE, CORBA, RPC, yada yada yada. The only thing is that neat tools for making it work on a web server (which is already overloaded with other crap).
Someone sat in a room one day and thought, "Hey, why not do that again, but on port 80/443 and with XML messages! And let's call it something new!".
The interesting part is the WSDL and UDDI. And that's not all that novel either, as tons of implementations use LDAP to define services. This is just more public.
Sounds like a lack of real consequences. When it comes down to "get it done or get fired" or something similar you'll see the real picture. School and its workload and timelines have nothing on the working world!
And then when you think you're at your best, have a kid or two. You learn to make every ten minute session at the keyboard mean business.
THis is a survey question, not a discussion topic. Half says 'Sure, I'd buy MP3'. The other half says "Nope. Not good enough." Why not send this back to have a real question asked.
You're not welcome by people unwilling to work smarter, perhaps harder, who will be steamrolled by someone with a positive attitude and a desire to work for good results. Nor by politicians pandering to those who need an excuse and a scapegoat. You're not welcome by those who feel their employer owes them something, instead of hte other way around. Unfortunately those are the voices being heard.
The worst of hte lot are the American IT 'consultants' who have been taking advantage of their clients, gouging with extraordinary rates, over promising, under performing, and leaving their customers holding a stinking bag of crap software and a bill. They've no conscience, no professionalism, and no dedication to anyone but the bank. I know because I was one for years. I left it because I didn't want to be associated with that. There are no honest thieves.
Others of us are eager to work with anyone with the skill, and especially those who have the desire to perform, to the point where they are willing to leave their home and family for a career.
Integrity, teamwork, and honest dedication to the firm are what American IT needs. If we can't get it from home, where I'm paying a premium for services, what's to lose from taking it overseas?
Slashdot Mirror
If you're an IT professional in any fashion and you cannot touch type it tells me that you've probably neglected other aspects of your profession, and I usually don't want to have to find out what that is. It's going to cost me somehow. You can't convince me that with two people with the same skills otherwise, the touch typer won't be more efficient and more focused on what he's doing. If you have to look at the keyboard you're not thinking about what else you should be focused on.
You ignore the pace of the business and consumer world. Personal spending and corporations can't evolve fast enough to absorb technology as fast as it becomes viable. That's why we're still running payroll on a mainframe using cobol. It's why PC's are still built on the same basic motherboard design we've seen for about 20 years. Things have changed, but not really.
"One thing that nature is particularly good at is the development of dynamic, self-organizing systems."
Seems to me that nature IS a dynamic, self-organizing system.
Mod this up. He used 'plethora' in his post. That's got to rank something for insightful (maybe even inciteful).
Physical products - cars, desks, pacemakers, light bulbs, you name it - are produced from engineering drawings that specify exact dimensions, materials, tolerances. They are manufactured on machines that themselves have been engineered to great precision.
Until software can be specified with such a degree of precision, until there is a software 'engineering diagram' that leaves nothing to be misinterpreted or misunderstood the developer will be left to his own machinations, and the industry will be left to the capabilities of its practicioners.
As it stands, no one can tell the developer just exactly what they wish to have built, no developer can be sure they've met the full set of true (not the stated) requirements.
Better languages, better software tools, better developer training will only do so much. It must eventually come down to the software 'Engineering Diagram' that is precise, accurate, and that ensures that the measure of correctness is unmistakeable.
You'd get the work done within the parameters that they've made you live in. If that's not possible, that's their problem, not yours. If they won't recognize that and you're letting them get away with it, you're the fool.
If I'm your manager and you've implemented monitoring or other procedures in a fashion that is not according to my design or policy you're at risk to be fired or otherwise reigned in. You do it my way or I'll find someone who will. I won't pay the price when you leave for having things going unmonitored or unmaintained because you've taken it with you. If you've done something other than what's been given you to do you've either assumed that what we've designed is wrong or we've missed requirements. Either situation needs corrected at first opportunity.
Your after hours at home support WOULD show up if you had a keystroke recorder that your employer might monitor to see your at-home activities.
NONE of these ideas EVER have produced ANY meaningful metrics.
I have looked and NEVER ONCE found any list of metrics by which the efficiency or effectiveness of any of these methods has been evaluated. It's all blowing smoke.
What an arrogant, judgemental @ss you are. You think there can be no reason to keep a job that might outweigh your feelings toward an employer? Say maybe the need to continue receiving a paycheck? Maybe the lack of viable employment alternatives? Perhaps a desire to stay long enough to vest a retirement contribution?
It's simple for a blowhard like you to say, "You should quit. They're scum." It's not so easy to execute it when you perhaps have financial or family obligations that have to be managed.
When viewed from a manufacturing perspective, IT is emerging into the assembly line model all over again. In the early days of manufacturing someone wanetd somtething built they went to a master craftsman. The craftsman had all the knowledge of how to build and all the tools. They knew how to get and use raw materials.
When the revolution started, materials were easy to get and they had a standard degree of quality. That is where the OS and programming languages are today. That's where database systems and intefaces are. Anyone can get to those resoruces and everyone can know how they will behave.
The industrial revolution brought about standards for design, and engineers could be taught the rules to design without them ever having to have the skills to build anything. Those designs were very complete, very precise, and delivered in standard forms that could be impelmented by anyone with the proper tools.
Along with the advanced designs, machine tools evolved that had the precision to replicate a design and to produce quality items from any proper design. Machining and assembly became commodity items.
With these two advancements, the master craftsman no longer had a place in the manufacturing cycle. He was supplanted by engineering and more advanced tools that brought manufacturing to the masses.
This is the model with software, but we're not there with software yet. And that is why outsourcing is a struggle today. Outsourcing assums that coding is a commodity skill that can produce a quality product from a proper design. For htat to be so, the designs of software must be as rigorous and systematic, complete and accurate and precise, as for any manufactured item. It simply isn't so.
Personally, I think we're there with the resources, but not hte tools and the design. Computers and the OS and the databse are adequate. It's the design and the tooling that have FAR too much variance. And until the industry has evolved to that point, in say another 50 years or so, it'll never be an assembly line, no matter how much sense it may make to the business world to try to make it so.
Like everything else, it comes down to risk. MOst often, all you can see is one end of a cable at a time, and you can't see how intertwined it may be with all those other calbes. To get it out you have to yank on it, which risks putting strain on everything else in there. And if one overzealous zip tie guy slapped one on in the middle there's no chance to get it by itself. The whole bundle will come out.
You can restart a web server. You can add anotehr if you're seeing a slowdown. You can bounce a server itself hen it's acting badly. You can get more servers when you need it. These are transient components of an enterprise that can be switched on, switched out, or added to without changing the state of your business.
Data IS the business. It's where you've been, where you are, and the best guide for where you need to be. It's what you've been paid for, what you need to be paid for, and who is going to pay you for it. It's the answer to every customer's questions. You tell them, "Sorry, my database shredded your account. Can you remind me what we sold you and if you paid for it?" when you switched to something less than Oracle.
NO ONE risks their data.
Glad you took credit(blame) for that. I thought maybe I had tone the telekinetic posting myself.
Actually, the bits about Tom are key to understanding Middle Earth, Gandalf and the otehr wizards, and in fact the entire struggle. It's not clear, but Tom and Gandalf and the wizards are connected at a higher level than is obvious.
Personally, I think dropping Saruman is rather appropriate.
Why don't you go to the Novell site and look at the SEC filings. You'll see exactly where there money comes from and where it goes. Just like any publicly held company, they gotta tell the public.
No sense speculating. Just do the research. From teh 2002 filing:
" We managed to maintain large network site-license revenue at $681 million, approximately flat to fiscal 2001"
"Novell's revenue, including the addition of revenue from recent acquisitions, was up eight percent to $1.13 billion, and cash flow from operations during the year was a positive $51 million. "
"Cash and short term investments on our balance sheet stood at $636 million at the end of fiscal 2002. Novell had no debt, and total assets were at $1.7 billion."
From the 10G for 4/2003
NOVELL, INC.
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS
April 30, 2003 October 31, 2002
In thousands, except share and per share data (Unaudited)
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and short-term investments $ 626,397 $ 635,858
Receivables (less allowances of $32,677 - April 30,
2003 and $39,676 - October 31, 2002)
183,672
214,827
Prepaid expenses 32,293 24,077
Deferred income taxes 19,420 21,204
Other current assets 25,166 23,572
Total current assets 886,948 919,538
Property, plant and equipment, net 353,183 369,189
Goodwill 180,579 179,534
Intangible assets 30,092 36,351
Long-term investments 55,603 73,452
Deferred income taxes 83,791 74,323
Other assets 12,385 12,678
Total assets $ 1,602,581 $ 1,665,065
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable $ 61,007 $ 57,241
Accrued compensation 78,498 87,778
Other accrued liabilities 124,337 134,850
Income taxes payable 28,764 36,294
Deferred revenue 267,546 275,344
Total current liabilities 560,152 591,507
Minority interests 7,841 8,016
Stockholders' equity:
Common stock, par value $.10 per share:
Authorized - 600,000,000 shares;
Issued -371,295,559 shares-April 30, 2003,
367,537,926 shares-October 31, 2002 37,130 36,753
Preferred stock, par value $.10 per share;
Authorized - 500,000 shares, Issued - 0 shares -- --
Additional paid-in capital 303,760 297,139
Retained earnings 698,164 738,663
Accumulated other comprehensive income 651 57
Other (5,117) (7,070)
Total stockholders' equity 1,034,588 1,065,542
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity $ 1,602,581 $ 1,665,065
There will always be theft, simply because even though I have mine, you have one to, and we can both get more free, if I can have more with you having none, I win.
Theft isn't entirely about scarcity, it's about competition and jealousy and all sorts of other things.
I've been on four projects that were "textbook EJB" projects. In the end they all abandoned EJB, after numerous failures along the way, for other more intuitive and less costly options.
EJB ranks right up there with 'New Coke' in my book.
Where do you think they got this idea? It's more 'IP' blackmail.
I've thought about using the vacuum unit from a woodworking dust reclamation system to provide airflow to remove hot air from my several cases. It would involve attaching a 2.5" plastic tube to each case and through a wall to the unit. I'm not sure what type of airflow those things generate, but it's enough to suck the sawdust from several woodworking implements at once.
Why a new name when it does the same thing that's been going on over networks for the last 20 years? This is nothing more than another version of distributed object technology. Just like DCE, CORBA, RPC, yada yada yada. The only thing is that neat tools for making it work on a web server (which is already overloaded with other crap).
Someone sat in a room one day and thought, "Hey, why not do that again, but on port 80/443 and with XML messages! And let's call it something new!".
The interesting part is the WSDL and UDDI. And that's not all that novel either, as tons of implementations use LDAP to define services. This is just more public.
Sounds like a lack of real consequences. When it comes down to "get it done or get fired" or something similar you'll see the real picture. School and its workload and timelines have nothing on the working world!
And then when you think you're at your best, have a kid or two. You learn to make every ten minute session at the keyboard mean business.
THis is a survey question, not a discussion topic. Half says 'Sure, I'd buy MP3'. The other half says "Nope. Not good enough." Why not send this back to have a real question asked.
You're not welcome by people unwilling to work smarter, perhaps harder, who will be steamrolled by someone with a positive attitude and a desire to work for good results. Nor by politicians pandering to those who need an excuse and a scapegoat. You're not welcome by those who feel their employer owes them something, instead of hte other way around. Unfortunately those are the voices being heard.
The worst of hte lot are the American IT 'consultants' who have been taking advantage of their clients, gouging with extraordinary rates, over promising, under performing, and leaving their customers holding a stinking bag of crap software and a bill. They've no conscience, no professionalism, and no dedication to anyone but the bank. I know because I was one for years. I left it because I didn't want to be associated with that. There are no honest thieves.
Others of us are eager to work with anyone with the skill, and especially those who have the desire to perform, to the point where they are willing to leave their home and family for a career.
Integrity, teamwork, and honest dedication to the firm are what American IT needs. If we can't get it from home, where I'm paying a premium for services, what's to lose from taking it overseas?
COST != PAY
The programmer costs his salary, benefits, software licensing, network fees, PC lease or purchase, security clearance, etc., etc. Training, materials, connectivity, travel, facilities (rent, desk, chair).
Talk to any manager about what's really in his budget. Just having you in a chair in an office and with the lights on costs thousands a year.