The MX4 Pro version will apparently still only come with 2 gigs. And runs kitkat.
But here's the question... why would anyone throw on an OS that isn't going to be supported by the carrier or anyone else? Given Canonical's abysmal record of listening to its' users, do you really want to go there with a device that's going to be more expensive than an iPhone 6+?
Problem you can't solve? You'll have to mail it somewhere or other, same as it was shipped to you in the first place, since this is a "web-only" product - no local support.
But that's okay, you can use this phone to replace your Ubuntu EDGE while watching your Ubuntu TV, downloading stuff from Ubuntu ONE, storing stuff on your Ubuntu Cloud, and using your Ubuntu Tablet/smartphone to write letters, and using Ubuntu for Android to run all those Android apps. Or you can see the pattern, and go "No f'ing way" like everyone else.
Meizu MX4 Pro Comes with Latest Android OS, v4.4.4 (Kitkat), Quad-core 2.2 GHz Cortex-A17 & quad-core 1.7 GHz Cortex-A15, Chipset MediaTek MT6595 and GPU PowerVR H6200MP4, IPS LCD capacitive touchscreen, 16M colors, 2560 x 1530 pixels, 5.4 inches, Multitouch up to 10 fingers & Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, Wi-Fi Direct, DLNA, Wi-Fi hotspot,
Meizu MX4 Pro has 20.7 MP, autofocus, LED flash Camera with 1/2.3’’ sensor size, geo-tagging, touch focus, face detection, image & 13 MP, 1080p@30fps front Camera, 16 GB internal, 2 GB RAM and microSD
Apparently it supports up to 64 gig micro sd cards, but the ram is still only 2 gig - and it runs kitkat. So who's going to pay extra for an odd-ball ubuntu version, even if it comes with 4 gig? Nobody. And given canonical's history of not listening to the user base, do you really want to depend on them for your smartphone software updates? I believe most people would say "not a chance in hell."
If you are asking for "real proof", that goes both ways.
So until there's proof, there's no valid reason to change current practice. Let sales and marketing provide proof, as opposed to hand-waving, that the current practice needs to be changed. The onus is on them, since they want the change.
This had been appreciated by our support and developer community, as they can readily see what issues are addressed and what new features have been introduced.
You don't need to make your internal bug tracking software public to do this. You only have to provide release notes. You can go one step further and publish a roadmap if you feel that is helpful. But none of this requires you to "air your dirty laundry". The fact he tries validate his decision with facts that don't actually back him up just shows me he doesn't have a very good argument.
I've emphasized the word "support", because the people doing the support are most likely the customer's in-house staff. If they're giving good feedback to their bosses, how is that a counter-argument? To the contrary, it does bolster his claims that it's good for business.
People know all software has bugs. Hasn't stopped Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Amazon, from doing business. If marketing doesn't know how to "feature" this openness - by emphasizing the responsiveness to users (not that it's open per se), then they're idiots.
If people are so knowledgeable about the fact all software has bugs, why do none of the huge companies you mention openly list their internal bug tracking data? They all have huge and experiences sales and marketing departments, and all of them feel it is not a good idea. Some cloud companies do publish very detailed uptime and maintenance reports, but that is because of how wary companies still are about trusting another company's uptime statistics. They still don't openly publish unfixed bugs
That one took only seconds to debunk. The number one smartphone software in the world in terms of sales has a public searchable bug list., including open bugs. FreeBSD, which is the base of OSX and which Apple contributes heavily to, lets anyone browse all bug reports or just open ones.
I'm not talking about the "openness of the software", but the openness of the complaint resolution process - which customers DO respond to.
"If you have a problem, you can post it here for the whole world to see how we take care of our customers" can become a matter of pride, even for closed-source software... or any product or service, for that matter.
Better to have it on your own bug tracker, where people can see that it was fixed, than some forum where, after it's fixed, nobody posts a follow-up so all the world sees is yet another apparently unanswered complaint.
If the marketing people were doing their jobs right, they would be searching for those complaints about competitors on forums, complaints that have gone apparently unresolved, and give them to their sales people.
If you've "sold" someone a product that is ultimately not the best fit for them, you have only temporarily gained a customer.
What a stupid, naive, pollyanna comment.
Still doesn't make it untrue. But attacking the messenger as being "stupid, naive, pollyanna" doesn't change the truth of the message - you've only temporarily gained a customer.
"Hide it, fix it, or feature it." It's the same whether it's software or politics. Featuring it is the wave of the future. "This bug was reported by this customer, and we fixed it for him. Here's his phone number. Ask him what he thinks of our product and service." "This feature was requested by these customer, and added for them. Here's their phone numbers. Ask them what they think of our product and service." "Yes, we had this bug, here's how we dealt with it, and here's the customer who was affected. Don't take my word for it - call them!"
Competitors who aren't open can't do that.
Everyone expects software to be buggy. It's how you handle the bugs that can make the difference.
The "require being a licensed customer" to have access means that you're hiding the process again. IOW, they have to take your word for it, same as when they deal with the competition. If you have a dozen competitors, all of whom are basically saying "trust me on this", and you're open, you're the one in the best position to build a relationship based on trust with the customer, because you are open, have proof, and aren't trying to hide stuff.
For your next point:
"Second: There is a massive difference between "lying through your teeth about the capabilities of your software," and "passionately advocating that your software's capabilities fit the needs of the customer."
The "false dichotomy" argument - another fail. There are plenty of shades of grey between outright lies and absolute truth. Sure, be passionate - but not to the point where it becomes shading the truth. If the product isn't the best for that customer, might as well be honest with them - they will eventually figure it out anyway, and, like I wrote, you have only temporarily gained a customer. The market is ruthless in that respect. And this is where being open can give a competitive advantage - your product might not be 100% for them, but by being open about bug fixes and feature requests, as opposed to a competitor whose process is completely opaque, you score points that might tip the balance (after all, it's rare that ANY product fits the client's needs 100%).
Third: If "what's best for your sales drones" is not "what's best for your customers," then you need to restructure your incentives - this is a corporate leadership issue, not a sales problem. Don't be surprised that people lie, if you incentivize lying. Don't be surprised that people steal, if you incentivize stealing.
Talking about ME being naive? People steal all the time, despite huge disincentives. If a sales person is short their quota and the mortgage and car payments are due, do you really believe that they won't be willing to push harder for what's in their best self-interest? Sales people lie. We've all seen it.
Fourth: Even if your sausage is *really good,* exposing the process by which it's made to customers and potential customers can be a turn-off. Especially when your competitors can sit there and *exaggerate* the defects without you having a chance to defend or clarify.
Never mentioned sausage - but if you're a sausage manufacturer, your clients (the big food distribution chains) will most definitely want a tour of the plant, as will government inspectors. No tour, no sale. As for other products, Toyota still gives it's competitors tours of its' plants. They're not worried "They're looking at what we're doing now and trying to emulate it." If you can get your competitors copying last year's plans, you'll always
Leases can have restrictions on the use of the vehicle (non-commercial use only,. so forget delivering pizza or doing the Uber thing), or on leaving the country -- or even the state (vacation? visiting relatives? better check first). Also you're required to maintain the vehicle properly. Even if it's just going to sit parked for the next 12 months because you suddenly lucked into a job that provides a car, you still have to insure and plate it.
Big accident? It's not up to you whether to just accept the loss and scrap it, or put the settlement towards a new vehicle. Lose your job? If you own the car, you can sell it. A lease? You're probably upside-down.
So you can't really just do what you want when you lease a car as opposed to owning one.
It's the same with phones. The plans where you take one or more years to pay off the phone, you don't own the phone. You are leasing a product that will be obsolete faster than a car. The only thing that depreciates faster than a new phone is next week's fish (and that will hold it's value if you freeze it).
Then again, CLM is targetting developers, a crowd that is used to the notion that software has bugs
Everyone who has used a computer in the last 30 years knows software has bugs. Even people who have never "used a computer" in the conventional sense know that the software in their car can go wonky. And anyone who's been watching the news certainly knows it, with all the scare stories.
Transparency is great: It helps everyone: Customers, Sales Prospects, Development and the Competition. Helping the cometition probably is much worse than the possible benefits received.
... and that's why Android failed to get any market share in the smartphone business.
... maybe they shouldn't have told the world it was running on top of linux? Just as OSX so totally failed in the marketplace because it is derived from FreeBSD?
All sarcasm aside, the more open you are, the more your competitors force you to step up your game and produce a good product. Is that a bad thing? Sure - for the competitors...
Sales is like herding cats. Most of sales is working corner cases and people sitting on the fence.
Sales is about getting someone to pull the trigger, make decision and make the decision you want. And it is the most factor in cash flow and growth.
The revenue difference in losing those sales is pretty massive. Certainly not worth falling on your sword for.
If you've "sold" someone a product that is ultimately not the best fit for them, you have only temporarily gained a customer. The day will come that they wake up and realize that you "worked them over" to get them to sign. They will be unhappy, complaining, and they will tell everyone within earshot (and on the Internet, that's a lot more than it used to be).
If your product is not the best fit for them, then you should thank them and move on to someone who can benefit. If there is nobody who can benefit without being "sold", then you should fix the defects in your product. Or find a better product to represent. The whole mortgage crisis could have been avoided if sales people had acted with an ounce of ethics and integrity, rather than what's best for them.
For a change - Sales and Marketing are right
Never EVER hang dirty laundry in public
Bullcrap. Ask marketing to provide proof (not anecdotes - real proof) on the number of people who have switched away from the product because of the bug reports. After all - marketing is supposed to be about numbers, how action x produced an increase/decrease in uptake, etc.
People know all software has bugs. Hasn't stopped Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Amazon, from doing business. If marketing doesn't know how to "feature" this openness - by emphasizing the responsiveness to users (not that it's open per se), then they're idiots.
The article is bogus. While there are restrictions if you "buy" your phone on a contract where you're paying it off at so much a month, it's the same as any other lease. Until you've completely paid for it, you don't own it. Don't like that? Then buy the phone outright. Then you're free to unlock it (heck, the big-box stores here sell the same phone locked with a plan and unlocked without at a higher price), take it apart, blend it, bend it, mod it, replace the OS, whatever.
Contrary to the article, owning a phone is not complex. Leasing one - same business practices as leasing a car.
Of course, if this is just going to be thrown onto the MX4-core, an older phone that has been around for a couple of years, and uses the Exynos chipset mentioned in the article, and not the MX4's MediaTek MT6595, then you get 1 gig of ram.
If you follow all the links (I know, this is slashdot, who reads the summary, never mind the links from the articles to their sources). the Meizu MX4 will be shipping with Android 4.4 (Kitkat). The whole "RTM" hype from Canonical is just that - hype, same as the "Ubuntu TV", the "Ubuntu EDGE Smartphone", the "Ubuntu Cloud", whatever. This phone will come stock with Android. The vendors will be stocking the Android version, because that's what's going to sell. The carriers sure as heck don't want to be stuck customizing and servicing an odd-ball OS. And the customers... it comes with Android, so except for a few zealots, it's going to be sold with Android.
Hence why the "Ubuntu" version will only be sold over the web - which is the kiss of death in terms of reaching new users. When you have a choice between buying the phone you're seeing in the store, holding in your hand, and others already have, or waiting to get something that nobody else has used (and plunking down more than an iPhone 6+ on top of that), guess what people are going to do?
So what if you will be able to eventually order the same phone with Ubuntu as an option? At that price point, nobody's going to be the guinea pig.
What's about the only time solar generates much electricity? On bright, sunny summer days. And when do power companies have the most trouble keeping up with demands On those same bright, summer days.
That depends on where you live. And what about those hot humid days with rain pouring down and the sun is nowhere to be seen? And hot nights when solar is generating zero?
Wind at least has the advantage of working at night, and all four seasons (solar panels get covered with snow, frost and ice).
For many areas, solar is better to use for things like direct hot-water heating, rather than converting it to electricity.
Canada has winter for 7 months of the year or more. Snow covers PV panels. So does frost. Shorter daylight hours occur just as demand peaks due to heating demand. We also have cloudy days, rainy days, foggy days.
And how does this work for tenants in apartment buildings? Or co-op owners in a high-rise? Roof space per occupant is a lot lower.
YET NOT ONE OF THE TOP 3 PARTIES WANTS THIS FOR ITS PEOPLE
AND yes the math is not exact here this is a quick example, now imagine the usa and germany doing this
Of course none of the parties want this - your numbers don't add up, and you ignore the reality that the backup storage costs and days/weeks/months when power can't be generated render this scheme really stupid, eh?
I think the reason that people are going a bit nit-picky (heck, I still call it assembler because, lets face it, it's always a specific target, and a specific assembler with its own syntax) is because of the implied assumptions in your original question. As someone who is comfortable with assembler, c, c++, java, the p languages, etc., I could see how silly the reverse question would be: "I have decades of c++ experience, and now I want to write a program in asm or c. Which is the better choice?" Someone who has both c and c++ experience would say "Are you ready to work without destructors? Without all those standard class libraries?" Thinking exclusively in terms of procedures, and not classes?
Someone who would pose the even worse question: "I have decades of java experience, and now I want to write a program in asm or c. Which is the better choice?" would get treated worse."Are you ready to deal with the macro processor and all those clever #defines that tend to obfuscate the code if you're not a c/c++ programmer?"
And of course, neither really prepares them for using assembler/assembly, unless they've already been writing embedded assembler in their existing code.
Learning the language is easy, compared to using it well. "A good idea, poorly executed, is worse than a bad idea, well executed." Marketing (which is part of execution) makes plenty of bad ideas look good, and gives time to come out with an improved version that is less bad.
So part of the problem is that your question is just an unfortunate twist to one we've heard too many times: "I have a great idea and now all I need to do is code it? How do I do that?" It's like the people in decades past who said "I have a great idea. If you code it, I'll give you 10%." I came very close to losing one friend over my refusal. He felt I was depriving him and his family of a chance to get rich quick.
As for my original advice, I would add this: You don't need to learn an IDE to do Android development. A shell, a few makefiles and scripts, and a cheap Android device (just buy a $100 android tablet) and the sdk and a usb cable. The android device can easily be put into developer mode with just a few taps on-screen. This would probably be more familiar for, and similar to, your current workflow. And once you learn the ins and outs of eclipse...
Either way, don't be discouraged, and try not to take any criticism personally - a mis-step here or there is no big deal in the long run.
If you use a well-designed makefile instead of an ide, there's no reason the code-compile-run cycle of a java app should be slower than a python app. Unless, of course, you put all your program into one humongous class, in which case you're either doing it wrong, using the wrong tool for the job, or writing something very trivial.
That being said, python has its uses, but to say people should prefer one language over another in part due to compile times, in this day of cheap multi-core cpus... why don't you just say "get off my lawn" and be done with it?
First, nowhere did you state that this was a personal project. If you had been up-front and written "I have a cool idea for a personal project..."
Given the context (your first line):
I am an experienced C and Assembler Embedded Developer who is contemplating for the first time beginning an iOS App Project.
... it's not clear whether you are putting this forward as something your employer wants, and you're thinking of throwing your hat in the ring, or a personal project.
Your questions make it VERY clear that you haven't even done the basic research, and your assumption that decades of experience doing asm and c (w/o any real experience in oop, objc, java, or whatever), this is not going to be an issue:
that I can tell you with confidence that in any reasonable Language, this is a medium-low-complexity Project
Sure, language has almost NOTHING to do with implementation. And yet, if you don't even know the language, how are you going to grok the APIs? To borrow your characterization, "your arrogant belittlement and holier-than-thou self-aggrandizement" that the language itself is something you'll pick up off-the-cuff because you are "an experienced C and Assembler Embedded Developer" - for objc, we're not talking about a scripting language here. Like asm and c, you have enough power to seriously shoot yourself in the foot. And thinking in terms of objects instead of procedural code means throwing away a lot of asm/c design and implementation habits.
When I wrote:
Why not just download the dev kits for Android [android.com] and iOS [apple.com] and ask yourself if you can even understand the development documentation, the APIs, etc? The problem right now is you don't even know enough to ask the right questions: you don't want to commit to something (objc vs swift) this early in your learning curve and then find out you made the wrong choice because you didn't take a month to pick up some basics.
... and you reply...
I do, of course, intend to start learning the IDE and APIs (at least for iOS) before I seriously commit to a programming Language
I notice you ignore the dev documentation - the stuff that gives you the overview, tutorials, the other stuff (not just the APIs), which you need NOW, to help you make an informed decision, because YOU are going to be stuck with whatever you decide. Thinking you can rely on "the Collective Intelligence of the Slashdot Community" to make the basic decisions for you? Have you not seen any of the holy wars - vi vs emacs, linux vs windows, kde vs gnome, gpl license vs mpl vs bsd vs public domain, the distro wars? Even the language wars in some of the respondents to your question.
"The will to prepare to succeed is more important than the will to succeed." I've worked in asm and c, and I would never be so arrogant as to suggest that either one of them would give me the mindset I needed for working in oop. Anyway, good luck with your project. You can use the links I posted to download everything you need, rather than taking mine (or anyone else's) opinions for more than what they are - opinions. Learning something new is always exciting:-)
And btw, I notice that, with 99 comments in, nobody else has bothered to actually provide you with the links to the official Apple iOS developers or Android developers docs, api, tools, etc. I at least showed enough respect for you to expect you to benefit from them. Was I wrong? Only time will tell.
Although I am well-versed in C, I have thus-far avoided C++, C# and Java, and have only briefly dabbled in Obj-C. Now that there are two possibilities for doing iOS Development, which would you suggest that I learn, at least at first? And is Swift even far-enough along to use as the basis for an entire app's development? My goal is the fastest and easiest way to market for this project; not to start a career as a mobile developer.
This portends badly. You don't know enough about any of the languages currently in use on any platform, and your goal is "the fastest and easiest way to market?"
The obvious solution is to give the job to someone else who knows what they're doing.
So, since that's not what's happening here (and any sane - and most insane - business would go that route), this is a case of "I've got a cool idea for a mobile app but I don't know anything about the platforms or how to code in the languages behind them, and I don't want to give any details about what its' performance and resource requirements are because someone might steal the idea." This is further borne out here:
If/when I decide to port my iOS App to Android (and/or Windows Phone), would either of the above be an easier port; or are, for example, Dalvick and the Android APIs different enough from Swift/Obj-C and CocoaTouch that any 'port' is essentially a re-write?
Why not just download the dev kits for Android and iOS and ask yourself if you can even understand the development documentation, the APIs, etc? The problem right now is yo don't even know enough to ask the right questions: you don't want to commit to something (objc vs swift) this early in your learning curve and then find out you made the wrong choice because you didn't take a month to pick up some basics.
A strong #2? So who was supporting the Laughable Bumblefsck? It seems like a long list of very ignorant people to beware of.
People who took everything he said at face value, probably because they voted for him before, and can't be bothered to do any fact checking when he says things like "My administration has had the lowest rate of tax increase in history". And the crack allegations were fake - right up until he admitted them (me - I said he was probably doing the whole "no comment" thing while trying to buy the video, and it turns out I was right). And then it was "the poor guy has a problem, people should just leave him alone. How would you like it if people treated you like that?" Totally sidestepping the issue that the guy can't do his job, was doing a very public meltdown, and despite multitudes of chances, only apologized (partially) at each step of the way when revelations made it impossible to do otherwise.
So yes, these ARE people that needed to be given a whack with a clue-by-four. Too bad that so many of them still don't get it. But there's no way her vote would be influenced by any sort of favor. She's already done the whole whistle-blower thing, including testifying in court. Such people tend to be on the "outs" when it comes to the distribution of privilege.
it's all up to you. if you're in the room the next some some retard with too much power makes a suggestion like this, just stab him in the throat with your pen. if we just put down all these fucks before they got too high up in society we'd have a fuckin' utopia by now.
Yeah, a utopia; or at least a caliphate.
... well, the pen IS mightier than the sword... (sorry, couldn't resist).
And unfortunately, the ballot box is too far after the fact to be an effective regulator of "stupid people with stupid proposals," because sheeple have a very limited attention span and don't want to believe anything that goes against their previous actions. Before Rob Ford dropped out of the race, he was running a strong #2 in the polls for re-election. Heck, one of my sisters said that people were only making fun of him because he was fat.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
What use is a soap box to defend liberty? The only soap boxes I can find in the supermarket are the size of a bar of soap (obviously), and I fail to see how this can be useful in any way to defend liberty. Is it a subtle hint that the enemies of liberty need a shower? Buggered if I know....
Soap used to be delivered in wooden crates. Handy to have one around to stick things in, kind of like the plastic crates that bags of milk are delivered to the stores today. Most people would have had one or more hanging around. So, if you wanted to make a speech and be seen, you could just grab one of the ubiquitous soap boxes and stand on it.
Or they buy one of these (inevitably over-priced, because if you're going into one of these places, you don't have leverage to bargain on the price) cars, and a year later you need to trade it in because it's falling apart. So they get yet another loan, after "trading in" that car to the same place at a loss, and having the remainder of the previous loan rolled into their next loan. The debt just keeps growing, they're deeper in the hole each year.
These sort of loans are sold as a way to "rebuild your credit" - but they don't.
I guess you haven't seen the crack shacks that pass for million-dollar homes on Vancouver Island. Places that would be tear-downs anywhere else in the world... Vancouver real estate is insanely priced. A million bucks gets you a fixer-upper. Or a small unit in a condo that was slapped together quickly to benefit from the condo boom.
We cannot attract new businesses here because they cannot transfer their employees. Existing businesses and faculties cannot attract excellent talent to the city because employees will not take what amounts to a cut in their standard of living to live here.”
Housing in Vancouver has become one of the most expensive in the world, outstripping international cities like New York, London and Paris.
The most expensive housing market in North America is not where you’d think. It’s not New York City or Orange County, California, but Vancouver, British Columbia.
So when management reads their trade journals and wants us to use this fancy, trendy new toy that doesn't really meet the needs of the employees, then we get all bent out of shape. But when development wants to use this fancy, trendy new toy that doesn't really meet the needs of management, we get all bent out of shape?
Yep, we're all iPhones now. So let's just stick our heads in the microwave -- and we'll even run 3x faster.
Slashdot Mirror
The MX4 Pro version will apparently still only come with 2 gigs. And runs kitkat.
But here's the question ... why would anyone throw on an OS that isn't going to be supported by the carrier or anyone else? Given Canonical's abysmal record of listening to its' users, do you really want to go there with a device that's going to be more expensive than an iPhone 6+?
Problem you can't solve? You'll have to mail it somewhere or other, same as it was shipped to you in the first place, since this is a "web-only" product - no local support.
But that's okay, you can use this phone to replace your Ubuntu EDGE while watching your Ubuntu TV, downloading stuff from Ubuntu ONE, storing stuff on your Ubuntu Cloud, and using your Ubuntu Tablet/smartphone to write letters, and using Ubuntu for Android to run all those Android apps. Or you can see the pattern, and go "No f'ing way" like everyone else.
Meizu MX4 Pro Comes with Latest Android OS, v4.4.4 (Kitkat), Quad-core 2.2 GHz Cortex-A17 & quad-core 1.7 GHz Cortex-A15, Chipset MediaTek MT6595 and GPU PowerVR H6200MP4, IPS LCD capacitive touchscreen, 16M colors, 2560 x 1530 pixels, 5.4 inches, Multitouch up to 10 fingers & Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, Wi-Fi Direct, DLNA, Wi-Fi hotspot,
Meizu MX4 Pro has 20.7 MP, autofocus, LED flash Camera with 1/2.3’’ sensor size, geo-tagging, touch focus, face detection, image & 13 MP, 1080p@30fps front Camera, 16 GB internal, 2 GB RAM and microSD
Apparently it supports up to 64 gig micro sd cards, but the ram is still only 2 gig - and it runs kitkat. So who's going to pay extra for an odd-ball ubuntu version, even if it comes with 4 gig? Nobody. And given canonical's history of not listening to the user base, do you really want to depend on them for your smartphone software updates? I believe most people would say "not a chance in hell."
If you are asking for "real proof", that goes both ways.
So until there's proof, there's no valid reason to change current practice. Let sales and marketing provide proof, as opposed to hand-waving, that the current practice needs to be changed. The onus is on them, since they want the change.
This had been appreciated by our support and developer community, as they can readily see what issues are addressed and what new features have been introduced.
You don't need to make your internal bug tracking software public to do this. You only have to provide release notes. You can go one step further and publish a roadmap if you feel that is helpful. But none of this requires you to "air your dirty laundry". The fact he tries validate his decision with facts that don't actually back him up just shows me he doesn't have a very good argument.
I've emphasized the word "support", because the people doing the support are most likely the customer's in-house staff. If they're giving good feedback to their bosses, how is that a counter-argument? To the contrary, it does bolster his claims that it's good for business.
People know all software has bugs. Hasn't stopped Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Amazon, from doing business. If marketing doesn't know how to "feature" this openness - by emphasizing the responsiveness to users (not that it's open per se), then they're idiots.
If people are so knowledgeable about the fact all software has bugs, why do none of the huge companies you mention openly list their internal bug tracking data? They all have huge and experiences sales and marketing departments, and all of them feel it is not a good idea. Some cloud companies do publish very detailed uptime and maintenance reports, but that is because of how wary companies still are about trusting another company's uptime statistics. They still don't openly publish unfixed bugs
That one took only seconds to debunk. The number one smartphone software in the world in terms of sales has a public searchable bug list., including open bugs. FreeBSD, which is the base of OSX and which Apple contributes heavily to, lets anyone browse all bug reports or just open ones.
I'm not talking about the "openness of the software", but the openness of the complaint resolution process - which customers DO respond to.
"If you have a problem, you can post it here for the whole world to see how we take care of our customers" can become a matter of pride, even for closed-source software ... or any product or service, for that matter.
Better to have it on your own bug tracker, where people can see that it was fixed, than some forum where, after it's fixed, nobody posts a follow-up so all the world sees is yet another apparently unanswered complaint.
If the marketing people were doing their jobs right, they would be searching for those complaints about competitors on forums, complaints that have gone apparently unresolved, and give them to their sales people.
If you've "sold" someone a product that is ultimately not the best fit for them, you have only temporarily gained a customer.
What a stupid, naive, pollyanna comment.
Still doesn't make it untrue. But attacking the messenger as being "stupid, naive, pollyanna" doesn't change the truth of the message - you've only temporarily gained a customer.
"Hide it, fix it, or feature it." It's the same whether it's software or politics. Featuring it is the wave of the future. "This bug was reported by this customer, and we fixed it for him. Here's his phone number. Ask him what he thinks of our product and service." "This feature was requested by these customer, and added for them. Here's their phone numbers. Ask them what they think of our product and service." "Yes, we had this bug, here's how we dealt with it, and here's the customer who was affected. Don't take my word for it - call them!"
Competitors who aren't open can't do that.
Everyone expects software to be buggy. It's how you handle the bugs that can make the difference.
The "require being a licensed customer" to have access means that you're hiding the process again. IOW, they have to take your word for it, same as when they deal with the competition. If you have a dozen competitors, all of whom are basically saying "trust me on this", and you're open, you're the one in the best position to build a relationship based on trust with the customer, because you are open, have proof, and aren't trying to hide stuff.
For your next point:
"Second: There is a massive difference between "lying through your teeth about the capabilities of your software," and "passionately advocating that your software's capabilities fit the needs of the customer."
The "false dichotomy" argument - another fail. There are plenty of shades of grey between outright lies and absolute truth. Sure, be passionate - but not to the point where it becomes shading the truth. If the product isn't the best for that customer, might as well be honest with them - they will eventually figure it out anyway, and, like I wrote, you have only temporarily gained a customer. The market is ruthless in that respect. And this is where being open can give a competitive advantage - your product might not be 100% for them, but by being open about bug fixes and feature requests, as opposed to a competitor whose process is completely opaque, you score points that might tip the balance (after all, it's rare that ANY product fits the client's needs 100%).
Third: If "what's best for your sales drones" is not "what's best for your customers," then you need to restructure your incentives - this is a corporate leadership issue, not a sales problem. Don't be surprised that people lie, if you incentivize lying. Don't be surprised that people steal, if you incentivize stealing.
Talking about ME being naive? People steal all the time, despite huge disincentives. If a sales person is short their quota and the mortgage and car payments are due, do you really believe that they won't be willing to push harder for what's in their best self-interest? Sales people lie. We've all seen it.
Fourth: Even if your sausage is *really good,* exposing the process by which it's made to customers and potential customers can be a turn-off. Especially when your competitors can sit there and *exaggerate* the defects without you having a chance to defend or clarify.
Never mentioned sausage - but if you're a sausage manufacturer, your clients (the big food distribution chains) will most definitely want a tour of the plant, as will government inspectors. No tour, no sale. As for other products, Toyota still gives it's competitors tours of its' plants. They're not worried "They're looking at what we're doing now and trying to emulate it." If you can get your competitors copying last year's plans, you'll always
Leases can have restrictions on the use of the vehicle (non-commercial use only,. so forget delivering pizza or doing the Uber thing), or on leaving the country -- or even the state (vacation? visiting relatives? better check first). Also you're required to maintain the vehicle properly. Even if it's just going to sit parked for the next 12 months because you suddenly lucked into a job that provides a car, you still have to insure and plate it.
Big accident? It's not up to you whether to just accept the loss and scrap it, or put the settlement towards a new vehicle. Lose your job? If you own the car, you can sell it. A lease? You're probably upside-down.
So you can't really just do what you want when you lease a car as opposed to owning one.
It's the same with phones. The plans where you take one or more years to pay off the phone, you don't own the phone. You are leasing a product that will be obsolete faster than a car. The only thing that depreciates faster than a new phone is next week's fish (and that will hold it's value if you freeze it).
Your main point is excellent. However ...
Then again, CLM is targetting developers, a crowd that is used to the notion that software has bugs
Everyone who has used a computer in the last 30 years knows software has bugs. Even people who have never "used a computer" in the conventional sense know that the software in their car can go wonky. And anyone who's been watching the news certainly knows it, with all the scare stories.
Transparency is great: It helps everyone: Customers, Sales Prospects, Development and the Competition. Helping the cometition probably is much worse than the possible benefits received.
All sarcasm aside, the more open you are, the more your competitors force you to step up your game and produce a good product. Is that a bad thing? Sure - for the competitors ...
I don't think you have ever been in sales.
Sales is like herding cats. Most of sales is working corner cases and people sitting on the fence.
Sales is about getting someone to pull the trigger, make decision and make the decision you want. And it is the most factor in cash flow and growth.
The revenue difference in losing those sales is pretty massive. Certainly not worth falling on your sword for.
If you've "sold" someone a product that is ultimately not the best fit for them, you have only temporarily gained a customer. The day will come that they wake up and realize that you "worked them over" to get them to sign. They will be unhappy, complaining, and they will tell everyone within earshot (and on the Internet, that's a lot more than it used to be).
If your product is not the best fit for them, then you should thank them and move on to someone who can benefit. If there is nobody who can benefit without being "sold", then you should fix the defects in your product. Or find a better product to represent. The whole mortgage crisis could have been avoided if sales people had acted with an ounce of ethics and integrity, rather than what's best for them.
For a change - Sales and Marketing are right Never EVER hang dirty laundry in public
Bullcrap. Ask marketing to provide proof (not anecdotes - real proof) on the number of people who have switched away from the product because of the bug reports. After all - marketing is supposed to be about numbers, how action x produced an increase/decrease in uptake, etc.
People know all software has bugs. Hasn't stopped Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Amazon, from doing business. If marketing doesn't know how to "feature" this openness - by emphasizing the responsiveness to users (not that it's open per se), then they're idiots.
The article is bogus. While there are restrictions if you "buy" your phone on a contract where you're paying it off at so much a month, it's the same as any other lease. Until you've completely paid for it, you don't own it. Don't like that? Then buy the phone outright. Then you're free to unlock it (heck, the big-box stores here sell the same phone locked with a plan and unlocked without at a higher price), take it apart, blend it, bend it, mod it, replace the OS, whatever.
Contrary to the article, owning a phone is not complex. Leasing one - same business practices as leasing a car.
Except that it only has 2 gig, and comes stock running Android KitKat.
Of course, if this is just going to be thrown onto the MX4-core, an older phone that has been around for a couple of years, and uses the Exynos chipset mentioned in the article, and not the MX4's MediaTek MT6595, then you get 1 gig of ram.
If you follow all the links (I know, this is slashdot, who reads the summary, never mind the links from the articles to their sources). the Meizu MX4 will be shipping with Android 4.4 (Kitkat). The whole "RTM" hype from Canonical is just that - hype, same as the "Ubuntu TV", the "Ubuntu EDGE Smartphone", the "Ubuntu Cloud", whatever. This phone will come stock with Android. The vendors will be stocking the Android version, because that's what's going to sell. The carriers sure as heck don't want to be stuck customizing and servicing an odd-ball OS. And the customers ... it comes with Android, so except for a few zealots, it's going to be sold with Android.
Hence why the "Ubuntu" version will only be sold over the web - which is the kiss of death in terms of reaching new users. When you have a choice between buying the phone you're seeing in the store, holding in your hand, and others already have, or waiting to get something that nobody else has used (and plunking down more than an iPhone 6+ on top of that), guess what people are going to do?
So what if you will be able to eventually order the same phone with Ubuntu as an option? At that price point, nobody's going to be the guinea pig.
What's about the only time solar generates much electricity? On bright, sunny summer days. And when do power companies have the most trouble keeping up with demands On those same bright, summer days.
That depends on where you live. And what about those hot humid days with rain pouring down and the sun is nowhere to be seen? And hot nights when solar is generating zero?
Wind at least has the advantage of working at night, and all four seasons (solar panels get covered with snow, frost and ice).
For many areas, solar is better to use for things like direct hot-water heating, rather than converting it to electricity.
Canada has winter for 7 months of the year or more. Snow covers PV panels. So does frost. Shorter daylight hours occur just as demand peaks due to heating demand. We also have cloudy days, rainy days, foggy days.
And how does this work for tenants in apartment buildings? Or co-op owners in a high-rise? Roof space per occupant is a lot lower.
YET NOT ONE OF THE TOP 3 PARTIES WANTS THIS FOR ITS PEOPLE
AND yes the math is not exact here this is a quick example, now imagine the usa and germany doing this
Of course none of the parties want this - your numbers don't add up, and you ignore the reality that the backup storage costs and days/weeks/months when power can't be generated render this scheme really stupid, eh?
I think the reason that people are going a bit nit-picky (heck, I still call it assembler because, lets face it, it's always a specific target, and a specific assembler with its own syntax) is because of the implied assumptions in your original question. As someone who is comfortable with assembler, c, c++, java, the p languages, etc., I could see how silly the reverse question would be: "I have decades of c++ experience, and now I want to write a program in asm or c. Which is the better choice?" Someone who has both c and c++ experience would say "Are you ready to work without destructors? Without all those standard class libraries?" Thinking exclusively in terms of procedures, and not classes?
Someone who would pose the even worse question: "I have decades of java experience, and now I want to write a program in asm or c. Which is the better choice?" would get treated worse."Are you ready to deal with the macro processor and all those clever #defines that tend to obfuscate the code if you're not a c/c++ programmer?"
And of course, neither really prepares them for using assembler/assembly, unless they've already been writing embedded assembler in their existing code.
Learning the language is easy, compared to using it well. "A good idea, poorly executed, is worse than a bad idea, well executed." Marketing (which is part of execution) makes plenty of bad ideas look good, and gives time to come out with an improved version that is less bad.
So part of the problem is that your question is just an unfortunate twist to one we've heard too many times: "I have a great idea and now all I need to do is code it? How do I do that?" It's like the people in decades past who said "I have a great idea. If you code it, I'll give you 10%." I came very close to losing one friend over my refusal. He felt I was depriving him and his family of a chance to get rich quick.
As for my original advice, I would add this: You don't need to learn an IDE to do Android development. A shell, a few makefiles and scripts, and a cheap Android device (just buy a $100 android tablet) and the sdk and a usb cable. The android device can easily be put into developer mode with just a few taps on-screen. This would probably be more familiar for, and similar to, your current workflow. And once you learn the ins and outs of eclipse ...
Either way, don't be discouraged, and try not to take any criticism personally - a mis-step here or there is no big deal in the long run.
If you use a well-designed makefile instead of an ide, there's no reason the code-compile-run cycle of a java app should be slower than a python app. Unless, of course, you put all your program into one humongous class, in which case you're either doing it wrong, using the wrong tool for the job, or writing something very trivial.
That being said, python has its uses, but to say people should prefer one language over another in part due to compile times, in this day of cheap multi-core cpus ... why don't you just say "get off my lawn" and be done with it?
First, nowhere did you state that this was a personal project. If you had been up-front and written "I have a cool idea for a personal project..."
Given the context (your first line):
I am an experienced C and Assembler Embedded Developer who is contemplating for the first time beginning an iOS App Project.
... it's not clear whether you are putting this forward as something your employer wants, and you're thinking of throwing your hat in the ring, or a personal project.
Your questions make it VERY clear that you haven't even done the basic research, and your assumption that decades of experience doing asm and c (w/o any real experience in oop, objc, java, or whatever), this is not going to be an issue:
that I can tell you with confidence that in any reasonable Language, this is a medium-low-complexity Project
Sure, language has almost NOTHING to do with implementation. And yet, if you don't even know the language, how are you going to grok the APIs? To borrow your characterization, "your arrogant belittlement and holier-than-thou self-aggrandizement" that the language itself is something you'll pick up off-the-cuff because you are "an experienced C and Assembler Embedded Developer" - for objc, we're not talking about a scripting language here. Like asm and c, you have enough power to seriously shoot yourself in the foot. And thinking in terms of objects instead of procedural code means throwing away a lot of asm/c design and implementation habits.
When I wrote:
Why not just download the dev kits for Android [android.com] and iOS [apple.com] and ask yourself if you can even understand the development documentation, the APIs, etc? The problem right now is you don't even know enough to ask the right questions: you don't want to commit to something (objc vs swift) this early in your learning curve and then find out you made the wrong choice because you didn't take a month to pick up some basics.
... and you reply ...
I do, of course, intend to start learning the IDE and APIs (at least for iOS) before I seriously commit to a programming Language
I notice you ignore the dev documentation - the stuff that gives you the overview, tutorials, the other stuff (not just the APIs), which you need NOW, to help you make an informed decision, because YOU are going to be stuck with whatever you decide. Thinking you can rely on "the Collective Intelligence of the Slashdot Community" to make the basic decisions for you? Have you not seen any of the holy wars - vi vs emacs, linux vs windows, kde vs gnome, gpl license vs mpl vs bsd vs public domain, the distro wars? Even the language wars in some of the respondents to your question.
"The will to prepare to succeed is more important than the will to succeed." I've worked in asm and c, and I would never be so arrogant as to suggest that either one of them would give me the mindset I needed for working in oop. Anyway, good luck with your project. You can use the links I posted to download everything you need, rather than taking mine (or anyone else's) opinions for more than what they are - opinions. Learning something new is always exciting :-)
And btw, I notice that, with 99 comments in, nobody else has bothered to actually provide you with the links to the official Apple iOS developers or Android developers docs, api, tools, etc. I at least showed enough respect for you to expect you to benefit from them. Was I wrong? Only time will tell.
Although I am well-versed in C, I have thus-far avoided C++, C# and Java, and have only briefly dabbled in Obj-C. Now that there are two possibilities for doing iOS Development, which would you suggest that I learn, at least at first? And is Swift even far-enough along to use as the basis for an entire app's development? My goal is the fastest and easiest way to market for this project; not to start a career as a mobile developer.
This portends badly. You don't know enough about any of the languages currently in use on any platform, and your goal is "the fastest and easiest way to market?" The obvious solution is to give the job to someone else who knows what they're doing.
So, since that's not what's happening here (and any sane - and most insane - business would go that route), this is a case of "I've got a cool idea for a mobile app but I don't know anything about the platforms or how to code in the languages behind them, and I don't want to give any details about what its' performance and resource requirements are because someone might steal the idea." This is further borne out here:
If/when I decide to port my iOS App to Android (and/or Windows Phone), would either of the above be an easier port; or are, for example, Dalvick and the Android APIs different enough from Swift/Obj-C and CocoaTouch that any 'port' is essentially a re-write?
Why not just download the dev kits for Android and iOS and ask yourself if you can even understand the development documentation, the APIs, etc? The problem right now is yo don't even know enough to ask the right questions: you don't want to commit to something (objc vs swift) this early in your learning curve and then find out you made the wrong choice because you didn't take a month to pick up some basics.
A strong #2? So who was supporting the Laughable Bumblefsck? It seems like a long list of very ignorant people to beware of.
People who took everything he said at face value, probably because they voted for him before, and can't be bothered to do any fact checking when he says things like "My administration has had the lowest rate of tax increase in history". And the crack allegations were fake - right up until he admitted them (me - I said he was probably doing the whole "no comment" thing while trying to buy the video, and it turns out I was right). And then it was "the poor guy has a problem, people should just leave him alone. How would you like it if people treated you like that?" Totally sidestepping the issue that the guy can't do his job, was doing a very public meltdown, and despite multitudes of chances, only apologized (partially) at each step of the way when revelations made it impossible to do otherwise.
So yes, these ARE people that needed to be given a whack with a clue-by-four. Too bad that so many of them still don't get it. But there's no way her vote would be influenced by any sort of favor. She's already done the whole whistle-blower thing, including testifying in court. Such people tend to be on the "outs" when it comes to the distribution of privilege.
it's all up to you. if you're in the room the next some some retard with too much power makes a suggestion like this, just stab him in the throat with your pen. if we just put down all these fucks before they got too high up in society we'd have a fuckin' utopia by now.
Yeah, a utopia; or at least a caliphate.
... well, the pen IS mightier than the sword ... (sorry, couldn't resist).
And unfortunately, the ballot box is too far after the fact to be an effective regulator of "stupid people with stupid proposals," because sheeple have a very limited attention span and don't want to believe anything that goes against their previous actions. Before Rob Ford dropped out of the race, he was running a strong #2 in the polls for re-election. Heck, one of my sisters said that people were only making fun of him because he was fat.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
What use is a soap box to defend liberty? The only soap boxes I can find in the supermarket are the size of a bar of soap (obviously), and I fail to see how this can be useful in any way to defend liberty. Is it a subtle hint that the enemies of liberty need a shower? Buggered if I know....
Soap used to be delivered in wooden crates. Handy to have one around to stick things in, kind of like the plastic crates that bags of milk are delivered to the stores today. Most people would have had one or more hanging around. So, if you wanted to make a speech and be seen, you could just grab one of the ubiquitous soap boxes and stand on it.
Or they buy one of these (inevitably over-priced, because if you're going into one of these places, you don't have leverage to bargain on the price) cars, and a year later you need to trade it in because it's falling apart. So they get yet another loan, after "trading in" that car to the same place at a loss, and having the remainder of the previous loan rolled into their next loan. The debt just keeps growing, they're deeper in the hole each year.
These sort of loans are sold as a way to "rebuild your credit" - but they don't.
I guess you haven't seen the crack shacks that pass for million-dollar homes on Vancouver Island. Places that would be tear-downs anywhere else in the world ... Vancouver real estate is insanely priced. A million bucks gets you a fixer-upper. Or a small unit in a condo that was slapped together quickly to benefit from the condo boom.
This is from 2 years ago - it's actually gotten worse.
or this from June of this year ...
We cannot attract new businesses here because they cannot transfer their employees. Existing businesses and faculties cannot attract excellent talent to the city because employees will not take what amounts to a cut in their standard of living to live here.”
Housing in Vancouver has become one of the most expensive in the world, outstripping international cities like New York, London and Paris.
As The New Yorker put it in May:
The most expensive housing market in North America is not where you’d think. It’s not New York City or Orange County, California, but Vancouver, British Columbia.
So when management reads their trade journals and wants us to use this fancy, trendy new toy that doesn't really meet the needs of the employees, then we get all bent out of shape. But when development wants to use this fancy, trendy new toy that doesn't really meet the needs of management, we get all bent out of shape?
Yep, we're all iPhones now. So let's just stick our heads in the microwave -- and we'll even run 3x faster.