>You'll be pleased to know that Jar Jar doesn't even > show up in Episode 4...
Oh yeah? Wait for the super-special maximum DVD edition. Lucas will insist he *always* envisioned 'A New Hope' with Jar Jar, but only now are special effects up to his vision. Now we'll finally get to see the pivotal scene where Jar Jar steals the plans to the Death Star.:-)
I don't know. My experience in the last 2-3 years (and especially the last year) is that cost centers are *extremely* unpopular... especially in the 'dot bomb' era. Don't you think a place like AOL/TW that has expereienced *huge* foob-ups over the last couple years is going to be quite sensitive to *all* costs?
I expect short-term thinking to rule here. Execs like to cut costs, and it takes a rare exec with some balls to put his ass on the line and fight for a project that is a net loss from most views:-).
I know video games helped me. I was born with pretty bad eyes... astigmatism, near-sightedness, and a strong tendency to be cross-eyed. I was in glasses by the time I was three, and I had to wear *hideous* glasses in pre-school and 1st grade, with tape on the lenses to block my eyes from crossing inwards. I went for vision therapy for several years. The biggest thing they wanted was for me to get hand-eye coordination. I basically had none. The biggest exercise was a tennis ball on a tether. When they took it and swung it like a pendulum at my head, I literally could not bat it away before it bounced off me (sounds mean, but it was more like a game ). No change after three years of this.
So my parents bought me an Atari 2600 somewhere around age 7. By the end of that summer, I had quite good hand-eye coordination (and had flipped the score on Defender a few times ). My mom was more than glad to let me play games endlessly after that:-). (*)
(*) of course, I think 20 years later now, looking at a CRT screen all the time has probably degraded my vision back a bit too:-)
Umm... I'm real curious as to how much code you write. Or have written. I'm guessing, not very much. Or not much in 'the real world'. "private" is, at it's heart, just syntactic sugar. No more, no less. It's an aid to you, the programmer/designer, to indicate the bits of an object that you don't consider to be part of the essential agreement it makes with those who call it. Those bits are "private" not because I think I'm getting any security by doing so... they're "private" because they're not something I want you to worry about (e.g., it doesn't matter to you if I hold my list of objects in a Java class in an ArrayList or a LinkedList, and I reserve the right to change my mind in future releases) -or- they're not something I want you to mess with (e.g., I don't want you to access that object list directly, because then you have to use the accessor methods I wrote, and those methods can handle things like cache management or logging that access to a remote system, etc).
I use "private" methods all the time in classes I write purely for internal code, among a team of 3 people total! These aren't people I'm trying to be "secure" against, that's not the purpose! The purpose is to encapsulate the API, and only 'expose' the pieces of an object that *matter*. Yes, it's nice to have the compiler check that, but I also wrote large amounts of OOP Perl code for years that used a 'private' methodology that consisted of merely prepending an '_' to the method names and putting a comment block before them indicating this was an 'internal' detail!
So, serious security issue? Please! Don't be naive! Private methods have *nothing* (repeat, **nothing**) to do with security. Never have, never will -- they *cannot* be a security measure when decompilation and debuggers exist!
> Is it just me, or am I finding a lot of inappropriate 'Off-topic' moderations lately?
I meta-moderate most Off-Topics are incorrect. I do the same to most of the Troll, Flamebait, etc. I almost always meta-moderate the "good" moderations as correct.
Why? Because it's always easier to be critical when you have a small amount of power put into your hands... so I tend to try to side with the person being criticized;-).
Anyway, as the admins have been pleading for a little while now, may I suggest using the meta-moderation power at your disposal occasionally? Takes about 1 minute to do...
People are still using applets? Huh. Didn't know that. Applets are *so* 1996, don't you think?;-)
Now, on the *server* side, well, Java just plain rocks. Servlets+JSP (when done right, not done moronically and with overuse of EJBs when they aren't needed) is very nice indeed.
Hmm... I think you dropped Ant too quickly. It certainly doesn't require separate build and source directories. I use it for all our projects here (well, OK, so that's 2 official projects and maybe 3-4 'toy' projects I'm personally working on), and in all instances, I have.java and.class files in the same directory. You can have a very minimal build.xml that does this, and automates things like JAR builds. For a project where you're already using Java, I wouldn't use anything else. It even plugs into most Java IDEs, if you're the sort who uses those silly things;-)
I've used both Tomcat and Resin (Tomcat much more back in the 3.x days, but a little 4.x too). I found Resin to be at least somewhat faster (definately the JSP engine was a lot faster), easier to configure, and generally well worth $500/server.
That said, Tomcat works fine for my needs, but I have not tested it under heavy loads. I *have* stress-tested Resin, and I can say it has never failed me:-). I find Resin + Apache a great combination (Resin handles application stuff, Apache handles static data + security needs).
Sorry, bud, but our Declaration of Independence (which I hope still has some meaning even under the rule of Bush and Ashcroft), says "*All men*" (and duh, women too, OK... ) are endowed by their creator with inalienable rights. We consider the rights we profess to be applicable to everyone, not just Americans. So yeah, I think we as Americans should be pissed at censorship and revocation of basic rights *everywhere*. Sorry if you don't like that, but that's one of the few facets of American imperialism I actually *like*.
(Now, of course, it would be nice if we actually *followed through* on this belief through our policy. I'm very sad that we as a government don't do that).
You need to turn the sensitivity meter way down. That request wasn't heavy-handed, nor was it even *wrong*. Exchange supports a "retraction" option (I see people try to use it all the time to my Unix box ). So, at least one mail server out there supports such an option, the option to recall a hasty email. What the CEO wanted to do was *correct*, you should have helped him. For him to realize his email was wrong to send is actually a *good thing*, shows some discretion on his part.
So, to be frank, I would have fired you too. You weren't being asked to cover up an oil spill or bury a body, and to get up on a moral high horse over something simple like this? Doesn't show that 'team player' spirit everyone likes:-).
So, what they're saying is, they're giving up on the hype, because apparently none of us are falling for it?
OK, bring on the next over-hyped technology. I'll just keep developing Web apps the same way I always have:-). Good old hand-rolled MVC style models still seem pretty solid to me:-).
I find all the "sophisticated" tools fall into this realm. Clearcase is one example, another is StarTeam.. These are tools designed for large, complex environments with possible multiple versions being tracked, and multiple branches within versions. They are nice, but usually so incredibly loaded with complex features that even the dedicated "build guru" (and how many teams can afford one of those?) is mystified and usually resorts to only using the bare-bones subset he's managed to mostly figure out.
So, my personal bias is *way* against those sorts of tools. CVS is great, provided you don't deal with binary files. I'm not sure if Subversion is ready for prime-time, but I've been glancing at that for a while as something to give a try RSN.
I doubt JWZ thought his departure would spell the end of the project. He just didn't care anymore, judging from what he said at the time and since. The project was bogged down, going nowhere in his opinion, and he had better things to do with his time.
Like manage to renovate and open a club and operate it for almost a full year before they ever got the release done.:-). I think he's the one who has been laughing the whole time...
The only thing they're throwing at him is cash. I'm sure he has no problem with that...
...plus, he has posted several notes about *trying* to use Mozilla as the browser on his club kiosks. Submitted bug reports and everything... so he's trying his best to be a good open source dude.
First of all, I can appreciate the realism in a game without being "obsessed" by anything. I can also enjoy the heck out of blowing up fake people while still being in real life a totally peaceful person (not a pacifist, but it would take a lot to make me use violence).
Also, "focusing on sad things" is actually a very good thing sometimes. In "The Art of Happiness", the Dalai Lama actually advocates several meditations on suffering as a mechanism for achieving greater compassion and happiness! Denying what is *bad* in life is silly, and doesn't achieve anything but fostering an attitude of denial. Engaging the "dark side" occasionally can be very helpful for encouraging the good things in life.
Actually, I just saw a History Channel special on "The Nazi Bomb". They argue convincingly that Heisenberg, leading the German efforts, didn't really *want* a bomb developed, and deliberately put forth less than his best effort. After he was captured by the Allies post-surrender, and learned of the American bomb, he took 3 days to (sight unseen) reconstruct how we had done it.
So, had Heisenberg wanted to, he probably could have built the bomb, but he was convinced himself that it was "too complex and too expensive", and so he himself convinced Germany not to push strongly on the nuclear efforts. The Germans were never serious about it, although the scientists at Los Alamos were convinced that the US was seriously behind in it's efforts (because Germany had all the means and materials at it's disposal long before we had even begun Manhatten).
The fact that we had all the Jewish scientists here in America (and that those scientists seriously feared the Nazis getting the bomb) meant *we* did take it seriously, and went full-steam ahead.
I don't really hold his ideals dearly. GNU, BSD, whatever. I'm pretty pragmatic in my devotion to open-source. It's just code, people. No need to get all antsy about it, sheesh. Public domain is the best license, IMHO. Screw the hoarders who'll take it and keep their changes, that can be their bad karma:-).
He just needs to give it up (but he never will). No one but him likes the assinine name, and it isn't neccessary to mangle a perfectly good name just to suit an agenda.
Maybe that's what bugs me... it seems so arbitrary to push this position. It just never seemed like anything worthy of his time, and it makes him look even more like a raving loonie than he really is (but hey, it takes raving loonies to change the world sometimes).
...or you could just change the title on your resume yourself. Take control. If you think you can hack it as a programmer, jump in. Lie. Bullshit me... Worst case, you get caught, but I've never expected anyone to provide me a contact at a current employer (who wants to let their current job know they're looking?), so you probably wouldn't get caught.
And yes, I think this is moral to do, provided you really can put your money where your mouth is. You'll probably have to bust ass to meet expectations, but far be it from me to stop you from doing so.
Actually, I've personally seen fees as high as 30K for a good person. Granted, this was 2 years ago, and the person was *very* good. Actually, IMHO, he was one of the best people anyone could hire;-)
That headhunter was a real scammer, though -- within 6 months, he was calling me to see if I wanted to move again... I had to tell him I had negotiated a promotion by then and was very happy where I was:-).
I absolutely, positively, *hate* it when I have to give my email address to evaluate something. Why? Because the sales droids then *hound* me. I have to be incredibly rude to them to get them to understand the "Don't Call Me, I'll Call You" mentality. One call from someone is very helpful -- I know who to contact with questions, and who purchasing should talk with if I decide to buy the product. A call every two days for two weeks is a little annoying... Don't \ broadcast to me that you're behind on your sales quota for the quarter:-)
As far as eval periods and evaluation license renewal, I hate cases where the eval runs out just as I'm getting to the interesting parts of using a product (for things like software modules, I might have to spend 90+ days just writing my pieces that hook into your library before I can see how it will *really* work out).
When you're talking a $2000+ sale to me, I expect you to give me an awful lot of leeway. 90 days eval at least (of the full product, more or less), and the sales rep should contact me *once*. I'd expect a renewal of that 90 days at least once during my development cycle (to allow for the *slow* speed of corporate purchasing... don't make me stop my compiles or development because someone in my organization is a screwup, you should understand how that's out of my hands).
Please, I've lived in Detroit all my life. Never been shot (or shot at)... and I go into the Cass Corridor 3-4 times a month on the weekends (only 2 decent clubs in the Metro area are there).
Come to Detroit... we won't hurt you, really. (ha ha ha ha ha)
But seriously... Detroit itself isn't all that, but we do have casinos downtown, and Windsor is just a hop across the border (post 9/11, it takes a *little* longer to make the crossing, but still 15 minutes most times at the border). Ann Arbor is maybe 20 minutes from the hotel, and Dearborn is maybe 15 minutes tops. *I* think it's still a fun town!
I'm hardly talking about "some guy" making a decision. I'm talking about a professional, who presumably knows his ass from his elbow, who picked the right language for the problem domain. If the app lasted since '83, paying $120K to maintain it is chump change... obviously, *something* worked, if you kept it that long:-). Language decisions (indeed, all architectural decisions) should be made with all the known variables considered... and a minimum of "hype". Don't use J2EE because it's "cool"... use it because it solves the problem you have, and saves time or money. If it *doesn't* do that, why the fsck would you use it????
I'm asking for open minds. Too often, decisions on the technology to use are made for the wrong reasons. That situation isn't ever going to completely go away, of course. But if you want to be more than a hack programmer, you should do your best to fight bad decisions.
The short editorial is good in that it points out what I suspect most developers already knew (but the marketers would never admit) -- there basically are very few choices offered in terms of "how to do it". As a matter of fact, I know in my part of the country, 95% of Internet application work being advertised is one of two things: ASP/DCOM apps, or J2EE apps (using IBM Websphere, sometimes WebLogic). That's it. No Web job I looked at in my two months of searching for a job recently specified anything else. No Perl. No C++ unless the job also specified ASP and DCOM. Certainly no Zope, Tcl, etc. Is this because no one uses any other technologies? No, of course not... but those other approachs lack a strong marketing organization behind them... Programming is as prone to the influence of hype as anything else.
That is what I think is important to assert; that other choices do exist, and it should be our job as supposed experts to investigate all the options. Diversity is a healthy attribute to have... Let's hope the "hyped" languages never succeed in marginalizing all other approaches.
Slashdot Mirror
>You'll be pleased to know that Jar Jar doesn't even
:-)
> show up in Episode 4...
Oh yeah? Wait for the super-special maximum DVD edition. Lucas will insist he *always* envisioned 'A New Hope' with Jar Jar, but only now are special effects up to his vision. Now we'll finally get to see the pivotal scene where Jar Jar steals the plans to the Death Star.
I don't know. My experience in the last 2-3 years (and especially the last year) is that cost centers are *extremely* unpopular... especially in the 'dot bomb' era. Don't you think a place like AOL/TW that has expereienced *huge* foob-ups over the last couple years is going to be quite sensitive to *all* costs?
:-).
I expect short-term thinking to rule here. Execs like to cut costs, and it takes a rare exec with some balls to put his ass on the line and fight for a project that is a net loss from most views
I know video games helped me. I was born with pretty bad eyes... astigmatism, near-sightedness, and a strong tendency to be cross-eyed. I was in glasses by the time I was three, and I had to wear *hideous* glasses in pre-school and 1st grade, with tape on the lenses to block my eyes from crossing inwards. I went for vision therapy for several years.
:-). (*)
:-)
The biggest thing they wanted was for me to get hand-eye coordination. I basically had none. The biggest exercise was a tennis ball on a tether. When they took it and swung it like a pendulum at my head, I literally could not bat it away before it bounced off me (sounds mean, but it was more like a game ). No change after three years of this.
So my parents bought me an Atari 2600 somewhere around age 7. By the end of that summer, I had quite good hand-eye coordination (and had flipped the score on Defender a few times ). My mom was more than glad to let me play games endlessly after that
(*) of course, I think 20 years later now, looking at a CRT screen all the time has probably degraded my vision back a bit too
Umm... I'm real curious as to how much code you write. Or have written. I'm guessing, not very much. Or not much in 'the real world'. "private" is, at it's heart, just syntactic sugar. No more, no less. It's an aid to you, the programmer/designer, to indicate the bits of an object that you don't consider to be part of the essential agreement it makes with those who call it. Those bits are "private" not because I think I'm getting any security by doing so... they're "private" because they're not something I want you to worry about (e.g., it doesn't matter to you if I hold my list of objects in a Java class in an ArrayList or a LinkedList, and I reserve the right to change my mind in future releases) -or- they're not something I want you to mess with (e.g., I don't want you to access that object list directly, because then you have to use the accessor methods I wrote, and those methods can handle things like cache management or logging that access to a remote system, etc).
I use "private" methods all the time in classes I write purely for internal code, among a team of 3 people total! These aren't people I'm trying to be "secure" against, that's not the purpose! The purpose is to encapsulate the API, and only 'expose' the pieces of an object that *matter*. Yes, it's nice to have the compiler check that, but I also wrote large amounts of OOP Perl code for years that used a 'private' methodology that consisted of merely prepending an '_' to the method names and putting a comment block before them indicating this was an 'internal' detail!
So, serious security issue? Please! Don't be naive! Private methods have *nothing* (repeat, **nothing**) to do with security. Never have, never will -- they *cannot* be a security measure when decompilation and debuggers exist!
> Is it just me, or am I finding a lot of inappropriate 'Off-topic' moderations lately?
;-).
I meta-moderate most Off-Topics are incorrect. I do the same to most of the Troll, Flamebait, etc. I almost always meta-moderate the "good" moderations as correct.
Why? Because it's always easier to be critical when you have a small amount of power put into your hands... so I tend to try to side with the person being criticized
Anyway, as the admins have been pleading for a little while now, may I suggest using the meta-moderation power at your disposal occasionally? Takes about 1 minute to do...
Yes, but how are the booth babes? I think that's all people care about.
;-)
Oh wait, this isn't FARK. Sorry about that
People are still using applets? Huh. Didn't know that. Applets are *so* 1996, don't you think? ;-)
Now, on the *server* side, well, Java just plain rocks. Servlets+JSP (when done right, not done moronically and with overuse of EJBs when they aren't needed) is very nice indeed.
Hmm... I think you dropped Ant too quickly. It certainly doesn't require separate build and source directories. I use it for all our projects here (well, OK, so that's 2 official projects and maybe 3-4 'toy' projects I'm personally working on), and in all instances, I have .java and .class files in the same directory. ;-)
You can have a very minimal build.xml that does this, and automates things like JAR builds. For a project where you're already using Java, I wouldn't use anything else. It even plugs into most Java IDEs, if you're the sort who uses those
silly things
I've used both Tomcat and Resin (Tomcat much more back in the 3.x days, but a little 4.x too). I found Resin to be at least somewhat faster (definately the JSP engine was a lot faster), easier to configure, and generally well worth $500/server.
:-). I find Resin + Apache a great combination (Resin handles application stuff, Apache handles static data + security needs).
That said, Tomcat works fine for my needs, but I have not tested it under heavy loads. I *have* stress-tested Resin, and I can say it has never failed me
Sorry, bud, but our Declaration of Independence (which I hope still has some meaning even under the rule of Bush and Ashcroft), says "*All men*" (and duh, women too, OK... ) are endowed by their creator with inalienable rights. We consider the rights we profess to be applicable to everyone, not just Americans. So yeah, I think we as Americans should be pissed at censorship and revocation of basic rights *everywhere*. Sorry if you don't like that, but that's one of the few facets of American imperialism I actually *like*.
(Now, of course, it would be nice if we actually *followed through* on this belief through our policy. I'm very sad that we as a government don't do that).
You need to turn the sensitivity meter way down.
:-).
That request wasn't heavy-handed, nor was it even *wrong*. Exchange supports a "retraction" option (I see people try to use it all the time to my Unix box ). So, at least one mail server out there supports such an option, the option to recall a hasty email. What the CEO wanted to do was *correct*, you should have helped him. For him to realize his email was wrong to send is actually a *good thing*, shows some discretion on his part.
So, to be frank, I would have fired you too. You weren't being asked to cover up an oil spill or bury a body, and to get up on a moral high horse over something simple like this? Doesn't show that 'team player' spirit everyone likes
Try stepping away from the machine and looking in a real dictionary. It's a word.
:-)
Lazy ass programmers
So, what they're saying is, they're giving up on the hype, because apparently none of us are falling for it?
:-). Good old hand-rolled MVC style models :-).
OK, bring on the next over-hyped technology. I'll just keep developing Web apps the same way I always have
still seem pretty solid to me
I find all the "sophisticated" tools fall into this realm. Clearcase is one example, another is StarTeam.. These are tools designed for large, complex environments with possible multiple versions being tracked, and multiple branches within versions.
They are nice, but usually so incredibly loaded with complex features that even the dedicated "build guru" (and how many teams can afford one of those?) is mystified and usually resorts to only using the bare-bones subset he's managed to mostly figure out.
So, my personal bias is *way* against those sorts of tools. CVS is great, provided you don't deal with binary files. I'm not sure if Subversion is ready for prime-time, but I've been glancing at that for a while as something to give a try RSN.
I doubt JWZ thought his departure would spell the end of the project. He just didn't care anymore, judging from what he said at the time and since. The project was bogged down, going nowhere in his opinion, and he had better things to do with his time.
:-). I think he's the one who has been laughing the whole time...
Like manage to renovate and open a club and operate it for almost a full year before they ever got the release done.
The only thing they're throwing at him is cash. I'm sure he has no problem with that...
...plus, he has posted several notes about *trying* to use Mozilla as the browser on his club kiosks. Submitted bug reports and everything... so he's trying his best to be a good open source dude.
Oh please. What is this, Hallmark?
First of all, I can appreciate the realism in a game without being "obsessed" by anything. I can also enjoy the heck out of blowing up fake people while still being in real life a totally peaceful person (not a pacifist, but it would take a lot to make me use violence).
Also, "focusing on sad things" is actually a very good thing sometimes. In "The Art of Happiness", the Dalai Lama actually advocates several meditations on suffering as a mechanism for achieving greater compassion and happiness! Denying what is *bad* in life is silly, and doesn't achieve anything but fostering an attitude of denial. Engaging the "dark side" occasionally can be very helpful for encouraging the good things in life.
Actually, I just saw a History Channel special on "The Nazi Bomb". They argue convincingly that Heisenberg, leading the German efforts, didn't really *want* a bomb developed, and deliberately put forth less than his best effort. After he was captured by the Allies post-surrender, and learned of the American bomb, he took 3 days to (sight unseen) reconstruct how we had done it.
So, had Heisenberg wanted to, he probably could have built the bomb, but he was convinced himself that it was "too complex and too expensive", and so he himself convinced Germany not to push strongly on the nuclear efforts. The Germans were never serious about it, although the scientists at Los Alamos were convinced that the US was seriously behind in it's efforts (because Germany had all the means and materials at it's disposal long before we had even begun Manhatten).
The fact that we had all the Jewish scientists here in America (and that those scientists seriously feared the Nazis getting the bomb) meant *we* did take it seriously, and went full-steam ahead.
I don't really hold his ideals dearly. GNU, BSD, whatever. I'm pretty pragmatic in my devotion to open-source. It's just code, people. No need to get all antsy about it, sheesh. :-).
Public domain is the best license, IMHO. Screw the hoarders who'll take it and keep their changes, that can be their bad karma
He just needs to give it up (but he never will). No one but him likes the assinine name, and it isn't neccessary to mangle a perfectly good name just to suit an agenda.
Maybe that's what bugs me... it seems so arbitrary to push this position. It just never seemed like anything worthy of his time, and it makes him look even more like a raving loonie than he really is (but hey, it takes raving loonies to change the world sometimes).
...or you could just change the title on your resume yourself. Take control. If you think you can hack it as a programmer, jump in. Lie. Bullshit me... Worst case, you get caught, but I've never expected anyone to provide me a contact at a current employer (who wants to let their current job know they're looking?), so you probably wouldn't get caught.
And yes, I think this is moral to do, provided you really can put your money where your mouth is. You'll probably have to bust ass to meet expectations, but far be it from me to stop you from doing so.
Actually, I've personally seen fees as high as 30K for a good person. Granted, this was 2 years ago, and the person was *very* good. Actually, IMHO, he was one of the best people anyone could hire ;-)
:-).
That headhunter was a real scammer, though -- within 6 months, he was calling me to see if I wanted to move again... I had to tell him I had negotiated a promotion by then and was very happy where I was
My god, I could not disagree more.
:-)
I absolutely, positively, *hate* it when I have to give my email
address to evaluate something. Why? Because the sales droids
then *hound* me. I have to be incredibly rude to them to get
them to understand the "Don't Call Me, I'll Call You" mentality.
One call from someone is very helpful -- I know who to
contact with questions, and who purchasing should talk
with if I decide to buy the product. A call every two
days for two weeks is a little annoying... Don't \
broadcast to me that you're behind on your sales
quota for the quarter
As far as eval periods and evaluation license renewal, I hate cases
where the eval runs out just as I'm getting to the interesting
parts of using a product (for things like software modules, I might
have to spend 90+ days just writing my pieces that hook into your
library before I can see how it will *really* work out).
When you're talking a $2000+ sale to me, I expect you to give me
an awful lot of leeway. 90 days eval at least (of the full product, more
or less), and the sales rep should contact me *once*. I'd expect
a renewal of that 90 days at least once during my development cycle
(to allow for the *slow* speed of corporate purchasing... don't make
me stop my compiles or development because someone in my organization
is a screwup, you should understand how that's out of my hands).
Ha! Wimp.
Please, I've lived in Detroit all my life. Never been shot (or shot at)... and I go into the Cass Corridor 3-4 times a month on the weekends (only 2 decent clubs in the Metro area are there).
Come to Detroit... we won't hurt you, really. (ha ha ha ha ha)
But seriously... Detroit itself isn't all that, but we do have casinos downtown, and Windsor is just a hop across the border (post 9/11, it takes a *little* longer to make the crossing, but still 15 minutes most times at the border). Ann Arbor is maybe 20 minutes from the hotel, and Dearborn is maybe 15 minutes tops. *I* think it's still a fun town!
I'm hardly talking about "some guy" making a decision. I'm talking about a professional, who presumably knows his ass from his elbow, who picked the right language for the problem domain. If the app lasted since '83, paying $120K to maintain it is chump change... obviously, *something* worked, if you kept it that long :-).
Language decisions (indeed, all architectural decisions) should be made with all the known variables considered... and a minimum of "hype". Don't use J2EE because it's "cool"... use it because it solves the problem you have, and saves time or money. If it *doesn't* do that, why the fsck would you use it????
I'm asking for open minds. Too often, decisions on the technology to use are made for the wrong reasons. That situation isn't ever going to completely go away, of course. But if you want to be more than a hack programmer, you should do your best to fight bad decisions.
The short editorial is good in that it points out what I suspect most developers already knew (but the marketers would never admit) -- there basically are very few choices offered in terms of "how to do it". As a matter of fact, I know in my part of the country, 95% of Internet application work being advertised is one of two things: ASP/DCOM apps, or J2EE apps (using IBM Websphere, sometimes WebLogic).
That's it. No Web job I looked at in my two months of searching for a job recently specified anything else. No Perl. No C++ unless the job also specified ASP and DCOM. Certainly no Zope, Tcl, etc.
Is this because no one uses any other technologies? No, of course not... but those other approachs lack a strong marketing organization behind them... Programming is as prone to the influence of hype as anything else.
That is what I think is important to assert; that other choices do exist, and it should be our job as supposed experts to investigate all the options. Diversity is a healthy attribute to have... Let's hope the "hyped" languages never succeed in marginalizing all other approaches.