The great technological achievements were not created with the idea of "Let's do this, so we can make a million bucks off of it.".
The technological achievements cited by the original author (HTML, radio, television) were not technical achievements of any kind. They were all just a small step taken after the small step before them. The only thing made these achievements worthy of history: they were each accepted by the masses as a usable product.
SGML existed years before HTML... no one made a big deal about it. Unix (as you pointed out) was invented long before it became a recognizable power. All of these types of technical achievements have happened in the past few years. Scientific advances in biology and nano technology as well as simple changes like the standardization of xml and the popularization of distributed applications and peer to peer file sharing. The only difference between these advancements and the ones the original author is looking for, is that none of the technologies I pointed out are done. They will each evolve before they are ready to be declared a landmark.
It isn't until these technologies solve very large real world problems that they will be worthy of history books. Most likely it will be done for money.
I would like to add my two cents...
At my last place of work, we had a very nice alpha (6 64bit 700 mhz processors, 4 GB ram, 4tb of disk space) - it hauled. It ran True64 (Compaq's unix). The only VM available for it was FastVM (also written by Compaq). They claimed it to be the fastest around. Compaq claimed it compiled the code down to machine code before running it. I can't tell you how slow this thing was. I was embaressed for java, until I realized it was just the FastVM. The same programs would run three times as fast on my 450mhz PC (running hotspot).
Now, you have to take this with a grain of salt. I didn't do any valid testing. I just ran our programs on both machines, and my PC smoked the alpha. I understand Compaq was porting hotspot for the True64 os. So this shouldn't be a problem anymore.
Imagine, if you will, hundreds of students taking a test in a large classroom. One of them, near the back of the room, perhaps, has a little chat session running on his handheld, allowing his friend who took that test during the previous period to feed him all kinds of useful information. Hmmm.
Students can do this today on a pair of $150 palms and thier ir ports
Doesn't anyone remember Divx? (the DVD rip-off, not the compression)
A large number of educated consumers would never support products like these. The corporations just haven't figured it out yet...
Programming is creative by nature, but being creative is not the same as being an artist. That would be like saying I am religious, just because I keep an open mind to the possibility of a higher power. Such a person would be spiritual. Religious implies they have a belief system. Describing someone as artistic implies the person is creating as a means of communicating feelings or ideas. Programmers are creative, but their end goal isn't based on expression (although how we get to the end goal may very well be an expression).
This is, of course, just my opinion. I do believe some code is written as an art form (code for the sake of expression), but it is rare (those wonderful multiplying perl camels pop into my mind - http://www.thinkgeek.com/stuff/things/321a.html).
Mozilla is supposed to compete with.NET using their new XUL. I haven't heard many mentions of this, and I'm not sure why not. Open source could really take off if both commercial and open software were ASP (open software would just be free, distributed programs). Star Office, available without instalation over the internet might be great for those who are reluctant to install Office XP on thier second computer (or work PC).
Subscription based software models should give open source an even greater advantage than ever - especialy if XUL (or some other replacement for.NET) can be used for quick-install, cross platform subscription based open source software (sorry about the buzz words)
choose one degree (don't run from the other)
on
CS vs CIS
·
· Score: 1
First of all, I assume you realize whom you are asking. Slashdot readers are almost entirely former CS and Engineering students. You can't expect an impartial assessment. There are many small minds who will tell you that the more technical degrees are better, simply because they are more technical. They will tell you that CIS is easier because it involves less math. I will tell you that you should make the decision based on your own personality. Which of these describes you:
A CIS major will take many intense business classes. CIS is not a fluff degree. There are real rules and procedures to learn in the subjects of Accounting, Finance, Statistics, Management and Economics that will break a student who is not motivated by business. Although CS students often see these classes as pointless exercises in common sense, many of these same CS students find themselves completely lost in the real world of cubes, procedure and business requirements, blurting out such phrases on customer conference calls as "if your data wasn't so f***ed up, this wouldn't be so bad" (real life example). CIS students are often drifting through their programming classes without the love for technology their CS counterparts have. Those who are passionate and self motivated get the best of both worlds, learning the best way to put together a real world application, and how to satisfy a client while still keeping the project academically correct. CS students learn the correct way to do things in much greater detail, but are seldom prepared for real world road blocks. Many (not all) panic and assume any compromise in academic perfection is a failure.
On the other side:
I have a CIS degree (in case you cant tell by the rant above). Until I moved into the workforce, I had always wished I had attempted CS. I was originally afraid of the math, but in retrospect, I think my business classes were more difficult for me than the math would have been. CS students are exposed to a much more technical view of the world, and although that limits many of them, many of them helped form the world we read about here every day.
If you are at all interested in business, or want to one day manage (successfully), choose CIS. If you are interested in the academic pursuit of technical knowledge, choose CS. Please, don't pick one because you are afraid of the challenge the other presents. We don't need any more "lunch-pail" programmers.
Slashdot Mirror
The great technological achievements were not created with the idea of "Let's do this, so we can make a million bucks off of it.". The technological achievements cited by the original author (HTML, radio, television) were not technical achievements of any kind. They were all just a small step taken after the small step before them. The only thing made these achievements worthy of history: they were each accepted by the masses as a usable product. SGML existed years before HTML... no one made a big deal about it. Unix (as you pointed out) was invented long before it became a recognizable power. All of these types of technical achievements have happened in the past few years. Scientific advances in biology and nano technology as well as simple changes like the standardization of xml and the popularization of distributed applications and peer to peer file sharing. The only difference between these advancements and the ones the original author is looking for, is that none of the technologies I pointed out are done. They will each evolve before they are ready to be declared a landmark. It isn't until these technologies solve very large real world problems that they will be worthy of history books. Most likely it will be done for money.
I would like to add my two cents... At my last place of work, we had a very nice alpha (6 64bit 700 mhz processors, 4 GB ram, 4tb of disk space) - it hauled. It ran True64 (Compaq's unix). The only VM available for it was FastVM (also written by Compaq). They claimed it to be the fastest around. Compaq claimed it compiled the code down to machine code before running it. I can't tell you how slow this thing was. I was embaressed for java, until I realized it was just the FastVM. The same programs would run three times as fast on my 450mhz PC (running hotspot). Now, you have to take this with a grain of salt. I didn't do any valid testing. I just ran our programs on both machines, and my PC smoked the alpha. I understand Compaq was porting hotspot for the True64 os. So this shouldn't be a problem anymore.
Imagine, if you will, hundreds of students taking a test in a large classroom. One of them, near the back of the room, perhaps, has a little chat session running on his handheld, allowing his friend who took that test during the previous period to feed him all kinds of useful information. Hmmm. Students can do this today on a pair of $150 palms and thier ir ports
Doesn't anyone remember Divx? (the DVD rip-off, not the compression) A large number of educated consumers would never support products like these. The corporations just haven't figured it out yet...
Programming is creative by nature, but being creative is not the same as being an artist. That would be like saying I am religious, just because I keep an open mind to the possibility of a higher power. Such a person would be spiritual. Religious implies they have a belief system. Describing someone as artistic implies the person is creating as a means of communicating feelings or ideas. Programmers are creative, but their end goal isn't based on expression (although how we get to the end goal may very well be an expression). This is, of course, just my opinion. I do believe some code is written as an art form (code for the sake of expression), but it is rare (those wonderful multiplying perl camels pop into my mind - http://www.thinkgeek.com/stuff/things/321a.html).
Mozilla is supposed to compete with .NET using their new XUL. I haven't heard many mentions of this, and I'm not sure why not. Open source could really take off if both commercial and open software were ASP (open software would just be free, distributed programs). Star Office, available without instalation over the internet might be great for those who are reluctant to install Office XP on thier second computer (or work PC).
Subscription based software models should give open source an even greater advantage than ever - especialy if XUL (or some other replacement for .NET) can be used for quick-install, cross platform subscription based open source software (sorry about the buzz words)
First of all, I assume you realize whom you are asking. Slashdot readers are almost entirely former CS and Engineering students. You can't expect an impartial assessment. There are many small minds who will tell you that the more technical degrees are better, simply because they are more technical. They will tell you that CIS is easier because it involves less math. I will tell you that you should make the decision based on your own personality. Which of these describes you:
A CIS major will take many intense business classes. CIS is not a fluff degree. There are real rules and procedures to learn in the subjects of Accounting, Finance, Statistics, Management and Economics that will break a student who is not motivated by business. Although CS students often see these classes as pointless exercises in common sense, many of these same CS students find themselves completely lost in the real world of cubes, procedure and business requirements, blurting out such phrases on customer conference calls as "if your data wasn't so f***ed up, this wouldn't be so bad" (real life example). CIS students are often drifting through their programming classes without the love for technology their CS counterparts have. Those who are passionate and self motivated get the best of both worlds, learning the best way to put together a real world application, and how to satisfy a client while still keeping the project academically correct. CS students learn the correct way to do things in much greater detail, but are seldom prepared for real world road blocks. Many (not all) panic and assume any compromise in academic perfection is a failure.
On the other side:
I have a CIS degree (in case you cant tell by the rant above). Until I moved into the workforce, I had always wished I had attempted CS. I was originally afraid of the math, but in retrospect, I think my business classes were more difficult for me than the math would have been. CS students are exposed to a much more technical view of the world, and although that limits many of them, many of them helped form the world we read about here every day.
If you are at all interested in business, or want to one day manage (successfully), choose CIS. If you are interested in the academic pursuit of technical knowledge, choose CS. Please, don't pick one because you are afraid of the challenge the other presents. We don't need any more "lunch-pail" programmers.