Steve Balmer rushed over in a last-ditch attempt to try and come to a deal
That is probably what made things collapse. I can see the EU report now...
"After negotiations broke down between us and Microsoft, the current CEO, Steve Ballmer, decided to get personally involved. However, he simply arrived, and jumped up and down chanting like a prick".
It puts Microsoft in the driving seat. They will dictate the advancement of the language and 'standards' and in an effort to keep development portable between the two platforms the developers working on the CLR for linux with work through the night to support the new features.
Do you think this would happen the other way around ?
I would love to see the linux community develop their own language specification for a C#-like language and implement both the windows and linux implementation... take control back.
Its not like Microsoft would have a case, after all, they did exactly this with Java.
I don't actually see anything about them that's worthy of a front page post on Slashdot...
Well they do seem worthy of an actual feature of slashdot. Isnt the friend or foe feature just a limited depth social network map?
I quite often see the 'friend of a friend' or 'foe of a friend' icons on posts as im reading through, so it seems that social networks are very much a part of this community.
This pretty much highlights where I find my faults in the system. Is it commented? Check! Is it Javadoced? Check! Does the output matched the expected output Check!
Doesnt matter if the code is poorly designed, inefficient and doesnt use the most appropriate library classes.... it passed the checklist...A+
Of course those that know me, know I have a fairly strong bias against formal education...
A startup requires some kind of protection from companies that are bigger and more established from taking their idea and using their extra resources to get the product to market first. The IPR laws were orginally designed to protect the small guy and give him a fighting chance... in this case they add competition to the market.
The problem is that they are being used as bargining chips by huge global-hyper-mega corps as the corperate equivilant of a nuclear deterant (You sue me for this and i'll sue you for that!). This is absolutely NOT what they are designed for.
It would be great to come up with some hard and fast rule that prevents this abuse, but I cant think of one. Perhaps some kind of patent lifespan restriction based on company net worth (to prevent a company with ample resources to develop a patented technology from just sitting on the idea).
I use IDEA for all of my Java development. Other members on my team tend to use Eclipse.
What im finding is that most of the features that exist in IDEA exist in Eclipse, but its just not as polished. Infact, after working with visual studio.net doing some C# development I can also say that the IntelliJ people could teach Microsoft a thing or two also.
An argument I hear often is "But Eclipse is free software, you support free software right?". Yes I do support free software but it is a benefit and not an ends in itself (or at least it should be Mr Stallman!). I will use the best tools I can find to help me do my job, there is often a maximum price (depending on budget) but no minimum. If the best is also free GREAT... party at my place, but given the choice between the right tool and a modest price and the wrong tool for free, I know what I would choose.
Not to say Eclipse is the wrong tool, but IDEA helps my development more than eclipse does and the offset justifies the price.
Thanks for providing this information. I guess I should probably drop the term engineer from my resume then, I was totally unaware of these restrictions.
I still think they are BS. I call myself a 'software engineer' because I have years of experience in the practices in engineering business systems (that go beyond simple coding), just like how a person would call themselves a golfer if they had experience in hitting a little white ball with a stick.
I am now forced to opt for developer when my skills and experience exceed this role simply because I havent wasted my time studying very advanced maths that is totally irrelevant to my choosen field.
Perhaps I should just find a synonm for the word engineer and use that!
I find that highly disturbing, and would not tolerate such a policy. Why should someone who is highly competent, productive, and well-read in the subject be forced to be "working on" a certificate that does nothing but expensively validate skills you already know are present? I value real degrees because they tend to deliver education. I devalue "certificates", because they tend to be light on the education and heavy on the testing.
Firstly, the certificates I mentioned are not that expensive. I paid for all of mine out of my own pocket.
Secondly, when I started the Java programmers cert I considered myself a pretty competent Java developer. I had worked on some pretty big systems and was pretty cocky about it. The practice exams kicked my ass for quite a while. For example, I get some pretty experienced developers asking me about thread states or subtle inheiritance issues. I would not be able to accurately answer these questions without that certification. Taking and passing the exam was an education in itself and certainly not an easy task.
Another poster pointed out the irony in my devaluing degrees but valuing these certifications. All I can say is I can think of at least 5 honours degree holders that wouldnt have even come close to passing these certs without serious study.
My understanding of the legal system (which is very limited) is that legal professionals are required to pass 'the bar' which seems to be some kind of 'court room' vocational test.
This is the role that some of these certifications play. I wouldnt use them for an absolute yes/no in the hiring procedure, but they do draw a line in the sand with regards to minimum vocational knowledge. Unfortunatly it has been my experience that degrees fail to achieve this/
Let me clarify this for you. Perhaps there are 'official' paths to the title of 'engineer' here but in my current position I am responsible for...
* Business Analysis - I have created UML representations of the entire business including those aspect that will not be translated into software, but aid us in deciding where that boundary will be set.
* Technology research - I have researched and chosen an appropriate set of technologies that will support the software we are developing and complement the skills of the current staff.
* Development methodology research - I have selected tools and practices that will enable us to develop software in the most efficient way possible (I tend towards agile methodologies such as extreme programming).
* Mentorship - I provide information to other developers on the best practices for J2EE software development.
* Development environment designer - I have created a complete environment for software design and development including launch on demand UML tools, version control, build environment, continuous integration and unit testing frameworks
* Developer - I design, write and refactor code.
I have been doing this for 5 years and im still only 22.
I consider myself a 'software engineer'. If the definition above doesnt constitute an acurate description of this role in academic circles then I am happy to be called whatever it is I have earned.
I still find it incredibly difficult to find work. I have glowing letter of recommendation but that doesnt get me past the 'MUST have degree' nazis in the HR department.
I think it is great that you are an employer that is willing to consider applicant that do not have a university degree.
As a 'letterless' software engineer I find this to be pretty uncommon. This is incredibly frustrating to me because during the 6 months I was unemployed (Im pleased to say this is no longer the case) I was passed over by many-a-position that suited my skills perfected purely on the basis of my lack of a university education.
YMMV, judging by your sig you are obviously an educated man but when I think about the truely outstanding technical people I have worked with during my relatively short career so far I find that that majority were those without the education.
Im not sure exactly why this is, but my theory is that it is too easy to coast through a degree by 'going through the motions' and then use it to mean more than it is. Usually those without the degree had to demostrate a higher technical skill level before being considered.
I do however, take slight issue with your point about certificates. I have found some of these to be very worthwhile. I have certificates from Sun in their Java programmer, Java developer and Java web component developer qualifications and found them (particually the programmer) to be an excellent base-line skill test.
I have recommended to my current employer that all developers working on our software should either have the programmer certificate or be working towards it.
I dont attempt to leverage these certs too much on my CV but they are far from useless.
I dont think you should tar them all with the same brush.
The point is that you are losing information. If the variable 'secretCompanyKey' is changed to 'a' there isnt a program in the world that will change it back... the information has been lost. Its like trying to reverse a hash.
Of course, native compiles do this kind of obfuscation anyway, but then native programs dont give easy to read, full stacktraces with methods and variables included either...
Personally, I feel that protecting IPR is the PHB's job, but when im debugging someones shoddy code, im very grateful for that stacktrace!
Well it would make the small world ride more efficient..
Rather than visiting all the individual countries, and seeing poor stereotypical models reprenting their culture... you can just sit in one room and video conference.
Yes, many 'language' people I have spoken to seem also upbeat about C#. However, they tend to take a fairly narrow view. I often here things like "C# has unsigned primitives and autoboxing etc", which is true but at most a mild annoyance when working at application level.
Java is far far far ahead in areas such as third party library support, and enterprise computing. C# doesnt have a component model to compare to EJB, ASP.net is fairly limited when compare to JSP/Servlets, infact C# is really lagging behind Java in most of the middleware categories.
This is probably to be expected given that one is designed by a desktop client software company and the other a high-end server compnay.
Im sure C# will begin to make some ground over time, but it is still someway behind.
The Sun SDK comes with sources to the standard API classes, there are alternative opensource virtual machines and compilers available for Java and changes to the environment are made via the community process.
What is it that is being ask of Sun here?
Even in GPL style open source development there is a central core of people who decide which patches make it into the product and which dont.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with the way Sun are managing Java as long as it remains freely available.
As for 1.5 helping to 'level the playing field' with C#, I dont think suitable credit is being given here. Java is ahead of C# in the vast majority of ways that count. All C# has done is formalize well know design patterns into syntax (delegates vs observer pattern). This is not worthy of accolade.
Make no mistake, it is Microsoft that is playing the catch-up game!
Slashdot Mirror
Bill Gates: "Smithers...errr I mean Ballmer... My wallet is in my right back pocket!"
Steve Balmer rushed over in a last-ditch attempt to try and come to a deal
That is probably what made things collapse. I can see the EU report now...
"After negotiations broke down between us and Microsoft, the current CEO, Steve Ballmer, decided to get personally involved. However, he simply arrived, and jumped up and down chanting like a prick".
With Microsoft's J#, you can code in Java on the .NET platform also.
Only if you are prepared to use 5 year old API classes.
It puts Microsoft in the driving seat. They will dictate the advancement of the language and 'standards' and in an effort to keep development portable between the two platforms the developers working on the CLR for linux with work through the night to support the new features.
Do you think this would happen the other way around ?
I would love to see the linux community develop their own language specification for a C#-like language and implement both the windows and linux implementation... take control back.
Its not like Microsoft would have a case, after all, they did exactly this with Java.
You are, of course, 100% correct. I stand corrected.
As a Java programmer, maybe im bias but i really hope that .net doesnt become the de-facto language on the linux client.
:o\
Feels like 10 years building a viable alternative to Microsoft and just as the goal is in sight... handing it over
That would be because Linux IS just the kernel. Everything that runs on top of it GNU.
Hi Richard!
Yeah... which was all fun and games until he got the bill!
Does it run Linux?
:o)
Give them time to work on the compatibility, this release is still pretty gnu.
I don't actually see anything about them that's worthy of a front page post on Slashdot...
Well they do seem worthy of an actual feature of slashdot. Isnt the friend or foe feature just a limited depth social network map?
I quite often see the 'friend of a friend' or 'foe of a friend' icons on posts as im reading through, so it seems that social networks are very much a part of this community.
A piece of software mimicing an IPod running on a piece of software mimicing an operating system.
This pretty much highlights where I find my faults in the system. Is it commented? Check! Is it Javadoced? Check! Does the output matched the expected output Check!
;o)
Doesnt matter if the code is poorly designed, inefficient and doesnt use the most appropriate library classes.... it passed the checklist...A+
Of course those that know me, know I have a fairly strong bias against formal education...
but i can neither confirm not deny that!
* Server implementation in latest tech - We'll do that
* XSLT internationalized web gui - We'll do that too
* SOAP and XML-RPC interface - Us again
* Integration with legacy COBOL system - Give it back to the yanks
Its a double edged sword this one...
A startup requires some kind of protection from companies that are bigger and more established from taking their idea and using their extra resources to get the product to market first. The IPR laws were orginally designed to protect the small guy and give him a fighting chance... in this case they add competition to the market.
The problem is that they are being used as bargining chips by huge global-hyper-mega corps as the corperate equivilant of a nuclear deterant (You sue me for this and i'll sue you for that!). This is absolutely NOT what they are designed for.
It would be great to come up with some hard and fast rule that prevents this abuse, but I cant think of one. Perhaps some kind of patent lifespan restriction based on company net worth (to prevent a company with ample resources to develop a patented technology from just sitting on the idea).
Any other suggestions?
Absolutely!
.net doing some C# development I can also say that the IntelliJ people could teach Microsoft a thing or two also.
I use IDEA for all of my Java development. Other members on my team tend to use Eclipse.
What im finding is that most of the features that exist in IDEA exist in Eclipse, but its just not as polished. Infact, after working with visual studio
An argument I hear often is "But Eclipse is free software, you support free software right?". Yes I do support free software but it is a benefit and not an ends in itself (or at least it should be Mr Stallman!). I will use the best tools I can find to help me do my job, there is often a maximum price (depending on budget) but no minimum. If the best is also free GREAT... party at my place, but given the choice between the right tool and a modest price and the wrong tool for free, I know what I would choose.
Not to say Eclipse is the wrong tool, but IDEA helps my development more than eclipse does and the offset justifies the price.
Thanks for providing this information. I guess I should probably drop the term engineer from my resume then, I was totally unaware of these restrictions.
I still think they are BS. I call myself a 'software engineer' because I have years of experience in the practices in engineering business systems (that go beyond simple coding), just like how a person would call themselves a golfer if they had experience in hitting a little white ball with a stick.
I am now forced to opt for developer when my skills and experience exceed this role simply because I havent wasted my time studying very advanced maths that is totally irrelevant to my choosen field.
Perhaps I should just find a synonm for the word engineer and use that!
I find that highly disturbing, and would not tolerate such a policy. Why should someone who is highly competent, productive, and well-read in the subject be forced to be "working on" a certificate that does nothing but expensively validate skills you already know are present? I value real degrees because they tend to deliver education. I devalue "certificates", because they tend to be light on the education and heavy on the testing.
Firstly, the certificates I mentioned are not that expensive. I paid for all of mine out of my own pocket.
Secondly, when I started the Java programmers cert I considered myself a pretty competent Java developer. I had worked on some pretty big systems and was pretty cocky about it. The practice exams kicked my ass for quite a while. For example, I get some pretty experienced developers asking me about thread states or subtle inheiritance issues. I would not be able to accurately answer these questions without that certification. Taking and passing the exam was an education in itself and certainly not an easy task.
Another poster pointed out the irony in my devaluing degrees but valuing these certifications. All I can say is I can think of at least 5 honours degree holders that wouldnt have even come close to passing these certs without serious study.
My understanding of the legal system (which is very limited) is that legal professionals are required to pass 'the bar' which seems to be some kind of 'court room' vocational test.
This is the role that some of these certifications play. I wouldnt use them for an absolute yes/no in the hiring procedure, but they do draw a line in the sand with regards to minimum vocational knowledge. Unfortunatly it has been my experience that degrees fail to achieve this/
Let me clarify this for you. Perhaps there are 'official' paths to the title of 'engineer' here but in my current position I am responsible for...
* Business Analysis - I have created UML representations of the entire business including those aspect that will not be translated into software, but aid us in deciding where that boundary will be set.
* Technology research - I have researched and chosen an appropriate set of technologies that will support the software we are developing and complement the skills of the current staff.
* Development methodology research - I have selected tools and practices that will enable us to develop software in the most efficient way possible (I tend towards agile methodologies such as extreme programming).
* Mentorship - I provide information to other developers on the best practices for J2EE software development.
* Development environment designer - I have created a complete environment for software design and development including launch on demand UML tools, version control, build environment, continuous integration and unit testing frameworks
* Developer - I design, write and refactor code.
I have been doing this for 5 years and im still only 22.
I consider myself a 'software engineer'. If the definition above doesnt constitute an acurate description of this role in academic circles then I am happy to be called whatever it is I have earned.
I still find it incredibly difficult to find work. I have glowing letter of recommendation but that doesnt get me past the 'MUST have degree' nazis in the HR department.
I think it is great that you are an employer that is willing to consider applicant that do not have a university degree.
As a 'letterless' software engineer I find this to be pretty uncommon. This is incredibly frustrating to me because during the 6 months I was unemployed (Im pleased to say this is no longer the case) I was passed over by many-a-position that suited my skills perfected purely on the basis of my lack of a university education.
YMMV, judging by your sig you are obviously an educated man but when I think about the truely outstanding technical people I have worked with during my relatively short career so far I find that that majority were those without the education.
Im not sure exactly why this is, but my theory is that it is too easy to coast through a degree by 'going through the motions' and then use it to mean more than it is. Usually those without the degree had to demostrate a higher technical skill level before being considered.
I do however, take slight issue with your point about certificates. I have found some of these to be very worthwhile. I have certificates from Sun in their Java programmer, Java developer and Java web component developer qualifications and found them (particually the programmer) to be an excellent base-line skill test.
I have recommended to my current employer that all developers working on our software should either have the programmer certificate or be working towards it.
I dont attempt to leverage these certs too much on my CV but they are far from useless.
I dont think you should tar them all with the same brush.
Of course they can attend...
They are up for the 'best newcomer' award!
How can you 'deobfuscate'??
The point is that you are losing information. If the variable 'secretCompanyKey' is changed to 'a' there isnt a program in the world that will change it back... the information has been lost. Its like trying to reverse a hash.
Of course, native compiles do this kind of obfuscation anyway, but then native programs dont give easy to read, full stacktraces with methods and variables included either...
Personally, I feel that protecting IPR is the PHB's job, but when im debugging someones shoddy code, im very grateful for that stacktrace!
Well it would make the small world ride more efficient..
Rather than visiting all the individual countries, and seeing poor stereotypical models reprenting their culture... you can just sit in one room and video conference.
Any quote from that episode brings back imagines of Miss Gellar in her coat (only her coat)...
Hmmmm I owe you one!
Yes, many 'language' people I have spoken to seem also upbeat about C#. However, they tend to take a fairly narrow view. I often here things like "C# has unsigned primitives and autoboxing etc", which is true but at most a mild annoyance when working at application level.
Java is far far far ahead in areas such as third party library support, and enterprise computing. C# doesnt have a component model to compare to EJB, ASP.net is fairly limited when compare to JSP/Servlets, infact C# is really lagging behind Java in most of the middleware categories.
This is probably to be expected given that one is designed by a desktop client software company and the other a high-end server compnay.
Im sure C# will begin to make some ground over time, but it is still someway behind.
The Sun SDK comes with sources to the standard API classes, there are alternative opensource virtual machines and compilers available for Java and changes to the environment are made via the community process.
What is it that is being ask of Sun here?
Even in GPL style open source development there is a central core of people who decide which patches make it into the product and which dont.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with the way Sun are managing Java as long as it remains freely available.
As for 1.5 helping to 'level the playing field' with C#, I dont think suitable credit is being given here. Java is ahead of C# in the vast majority of ways that count. All C# has done is formalize well know design patterns into syntax (delegates vs observer pattern). This is not worthy of accolade.
Make no mistake, it is Microsoft that is playing the catch-up game!