I think a lot of open source projects are proof that Comp Sci degrees are almost pointless.
Couldn't let this one go...
The assumption here is that an open source program will displace its closest commercial relative and the developers who did work on the commercial version will now rank among the homeless. The other assumption is that most programmers earn their living through commercial software; this is a common misconception.
First, very few computer professionals will ever generate a product that you'll find on the shelves of your local WallMart. If you're a programmer and you work for a company, unless that company makes commercial software, your work will probably be unknown outside the company. Your projects often include keeping some legacy stuff limping along.
Open source may impact off the shelf market sales, but you seriously can't equate that to the work done by the majority of employed programmers.
Their are two kinds of computer professionals in the world; those who truly enjoy the tech (geek) and those who simply do their job (drone). The drone will do what is required, but only what is required. He takes no joy in his profession and marks time until he can leave it.
The geek on, the other hand, is the far more desirable employee. He'll keep up to date without prompting and will even educate himself on his own time. While work can be a grind, the satisfaction of doing it well is often enough compensation to keep him going. He'll even occasionally work for a lower paycheck if he finds an environment to his liking.
Unfortunately, while these two species can easily recognize each other on site, outsiders have a harder time differentiating. In an interview, the successful drone has a disconcerting ability to mimic the geek, casting a cloud of confusion around their true skill level. Conversely, the geek may not adequately convey their skill level to those not conversant in reading the signs.
I now see fewer drones than in years past. If this is a sign they are dying out, I welcome it.
For the record, I'm an Oracle DBA / developer with a BS in English Lit. The best geeks are, as always, self taught.
Indeed, Eastern sensibilities are so profoundly different from those of the West that very few Westerners can even appreciate the mindset. The feeling of community and an individual's role simply diverge too radically between Asian and Eurocentric ( this includes US ) cultures.
Historically, Chinese have always looked to the past for an ideal society. The Golden Past, with the Golden Emperor and the time of perfect order. The underlying message is that the idealized perfection that once was can be attained again.
In the West, we look to the future. Probably due Christian ideals; the past has Sin, the future redemption. The ostensively Christian world is unusual in this, most other cultures strive to maintain harmony with some well defined past ideal rather than a nebulous future one.
On the surface the result is the same, both models are ultimately unattainable. But the perspective is quite different.
I've always been amazed at how well China took to the very Western ideals of Marx and Engle. Communism as a future, utopia ideology would seem to run counter to the perspective of the "center kingdom". Indeed, China even more than Japan has an historic disdain for Western philosophy. Interestingly, the ideals of universal equality did speak strongly to China, and there you are.
I'll preface this by saying I don't believe there is a fundamental correlation between math and most areas that computer science covers. Higher math is required for some theory and, ironically, mostly game programming.
The computer itself is a poor mathematician. It's excellent at logic and uses this and a few million calculations a second to simulate math prowess.
If you want a computer to solve even the simplest equation you'll often have to roll up your sleeves and force feed it Fermat. However, apply complex logic to a problem, with forked solution trees and heuristics, and it will dance through the xor mine field like a ballet dancer.
When people ask me what programming a computer is most like I immediately liken it to doing proof in geometry. If you can get from point A to point B using nomenclature like "SAS", you're ready for programming.
Calculus is only required because some people like it and math professors get lonely. For 3D coordinate systems you might need it ( though, less than matrix algebra ). However, a solid understanding of logic and diagnostic principals will benefit any programmer.
I'm not sure what issue taken with this is. Everyone who works a regular job is expected to show up on time and stay the duration of the day. Many jobs have some kind of time card system in place to help monitor this. That the system is more automated and exact would only be of concern to those who wish to cheat the system.
I work for a public utility. We had the hand punch system years ago. ( I always threatened to make a rubber hand, but never got around to it. ) Now we have the finger print reader instead. Overall, it tends to help both sides, since employees can often prove they were on site even if their supervisors weren't sure.
As a side note, biometric data can leak. Our finger print database is intentionally stored at a slightly lower resolution than the federal standard. The reason is that if we kept government quality information, we'd be required to surrender a copy of that information to the government. Now that's scary.
C# is basically Java for Windows, take two. It does seem to have learned from the evolution of Java and cleaned some of the messier bits.
Exception handling is a little looser, without the need to declare thrown exceptions or catch those declarations. There is a still an exception based error handling system, it's just more implicit than explicit.
I really like the properties, an idea they took from Visual Basic. At some point in Java history (birth of EBJs?) it was concluded that public class variables were a bad idea. Java standardized on a getter / setter model that is more a convention rather than a language rule. C# uses a property, which has either a get, set, or both. If fills the same OOP niche, only more cleanly.
There is also some neat static ( class level ) functionality. Interestingly, while exceptions aren't explicit, inheritance is. A method must be declared virtual to be overridden, a more C++ thing to do.
Basically, there are many little changes from Java that make C# not Java. But, the changes do make sense and make C# an enjoyable language to program in.
The VB.NET was part of the initial plan. Visual Basic is just one of those things that most Windows programmers are reasonably comfortable with. It's non threatening.
When Visual Studio came in, I did a simple Oracle client app in both VB and C#. The code was pretty much the same between the two projects. However, the differences between VB.NET and plain ole VB are monumental. It's really just a ruse to get stunted VB programmers to buy into.NET before they see what it entails.
If you're going.NET, C# code is more concise and usable than what appears to be legacy VB support. The event support is clean, the class, interface, abstraction architecture is understandable. While none of the MS docs will mention the J word, in many ways C# is Java for Windows..NET is OO at heart, it makes sense to talk to it in the OO language that was designed for it.
I'm a programmer / project manager ( / DBA, etc. ) for a very small shop. We write in house programs for specific industry requirements.
We've done stuff in Java; as an OOP advocate, I love Java. As project manager, I get blank stares from programmers that want the equivalent of visual basic to work in. We've now standardized on C#.NET. The programmers still look a little lost when I emphasize OO practices, but they're real happy with Visual Studio to hold their hands.
So,
Is it faster? Perhaps. Remember, in a rich client GUI environment,.NET can leverage native OS architecture quite efficiently. It simply blows Java Swing away in this area.
Is Development Faster ? YES. Bash them all the you like. Microsoft's development tools have always been good. The Visual Studio suite is much better than any equivalent product I've seen.
Is it cross platform ? No Yes, a big no here. However, expect to see the CLR running on platforms other than straight up Windows in the future. In the end, when most commercial clients run Windows this is more of a selling point than a detriment.
Does it do things that other languages cannot? No Well, this can pretty much be said of any language. As a Java programmer, I really enjoy C#, it's does the same thing as Java, it just does it quite well for Windows.
Is it Encumbered By Patents? Yes So? For OSS this doesn't fly, for the boss, this isn't really a consideration.
> This makes PostgreSQL one step closer to being able to replace Oracle...
Please! While this may help win the hearts and minds of OOS geeks, it does little to improve their standing in the business world.
Oracle is as established in the database world as Microsoft is on the desktop. This alone would doom any OOS wannabe to quiet places like web server back ends where they already do well anyway ( e.g. mySql ).
Put aside the technical considerations, support, client base, etc and PostgreSQL still offers as much of a threat to Oracle as mySql or dBase. The only real threat I've seen to Oracle supremacy is Microsoft's SQL Server but, of course, that's only in MS shops.
Force them to make the decision as to the use of your time. Simply, make them prioritize their own requests.
Ask things like, "is this more important than this other thing you asked me to work on? Which would you like me to work on first?" Say things like, "you understand, this will delay that other item, right?"
When they want both done simultaneously, against all laws of time and space, you must reason calmly for them. Because, chances are, they haven't reasoned out the impact of the request themselves. You must make it clear how this request will change the status of other outstanding request. You should make them tell you precisely what to do and gently tell them the downside of it.
If the person making the request fully understands the gain and loss of putting further strain on a resource, they can make the decision that will make them happiest.
The supposition of the article entirely ignores the history of innovation.
It assumes that design for a wealthy elite's amusement or comfort is a waste of time. However, many inventions that don't have a military pedigree begin life as a novelty or plaything of the privileged.
Just because the uses of some new technology today seem trivial doesn't mean they wont be extremely useful in the future. Let the early adopters pay for the R & D with their toys. Encourage them to do it! Ultimately their folly might do everyone some good.
You got me all excited for stains?
I fail to see how this would imply water. Why not different color strata that get disturbed or shift for any number of reasons?
As intriguing as Martian rivers would be, imposing the desire on scant evidence is poor science at best.
When designing a database application the first decision is where the application logic should be stored. In a large database the choice is to store logic in the database or in the application.
There are good reasons for both approaches, but mySQL limits you to strictly application logic. While this is not bad and makes most programmers happy, it's also one of the most common causes for inefficient database usage. Most programmers think more in loops than SQL and a loop is the kiss of death for a database.
The one undeniable requirement of a database is the ability to filter and return only the data needed for a given operation. Since mySQL does not support sub queries, stored procedures, ref cursors, etc, it simply can't do this. The work around is to pull the required information and analyze it in the application. Again, this is a programming solution that has to be applied because the database is not up to the task.
The argument against the big databases is that they offer too many things that folks don't use. This may be true, but the corollary is that there is a large pool of things that I can and will use.
I would use mySQL in the same places I'd use MS Access for about the same reasons. This makes it a handy tool for database development and testing. However, I don't think it really qualifies it as an enterprise database or a realistic "threat" to Oracle, DB2, SQL Server, etc.
I thought it was rather concise, actually.
Honestly, Cronkite was possibly unbiased and it's been downhill since then. I've given up being annoyed by charged language in national news. You can hardly blame amateurs when so called professionals set such a low standard.
Slashdot Mirror
Couldn't let this one go...
The assumption here is that an open source program will displace its closest commercial relative and the developers who did work on the commercial version will now rank among the homeless. The other assumption is that most programmers earn their living through commercial software; this is a common misconception.
First, very few computer professionals will ever generate a product that you'll find on the shelves of your local WallMart. If you're a programmer and you work for a company, unless that company makes commercial software, your work will probably be unknown outside the company. Your projects often include keeping some legacy stuff limping along.
Open source may impact off the shelf market sales, but you seriously can't equate that to the work done by the majority of employed programmers.
Their are two kinds of computer professionals in the world; those who truly enjoy the tech (geek) and those who simply do their job (drone). The drone will do what is required, but only what is required. He takes no joy in his profession and marks time until he can leave it.
The geek on, the other hand, is the far more desirable employee. He'll keep up to date without prompting and will even educate himself on his own time. While work can be a grind, the satisfaction of doing it well is often enough compensation to keep him going. He'll even occasionally work for a lower paycheck if he finds an environment to his liking.
Unfortunately, while these two species can easily recognize each other on site, outsiders have a harder time differentiating. In an interview, the successful drone has a disconcerting ability to mimic the geek, casting a cloud of confusion around their true skill level. Conversely, the geek may not adequately convey their skill level to those not conversant in reading the signs.
I now see fewer drones than in years past. If this is a sign they are dying out, I welcome it.
For the record, I'm an Oracle DBA / developer with a BS in English Lit. The best geeks are, as always, self taught.
Well said.
Indeed, Eastern sensibilities are so profoundly different from those of the West that very few Westerners can even appreciate the mindset. The feeling of community and an individual's role simply diverge too radically between Asian and Eurocentric ( this includes US ) cultures.
Historically, Chinese have always looked to the past for an ideal society. The Golden Past, with the Golden Emperor and the time of perfect order. The underlying message is that the idealized perfection that once was can be attained again.
In the West, we look to the future. Probably due Christian ideals; the past has Sin, the future redemption. The ostensively Christian world is unusual in this, most other cultures strive to maintain harmony with some well defined past ideal rather than a nebulous future one.
On the surface the result is the same, both models are ultimately unattainable. But the perspective is quite different.
I've always been amazed at how well China took to the very Western ideals of Marx and Engle. Communism as a future, utopia ideology would seem to run counter to the perspective of the "center kingdom". Indeed, China even more than Japan has an historic disdain for Western philosophy. Interestingly, the ideals of universal equality did speak strongly to China, and there you are.
I'll preface this by saying I don't believe there is a fundamental correlation between math and most areas that computer science covers. Higher math is required for some theory and, ironically, mostly game programming.
The computer itself is a poor mathematician. It's excellent at logic and uses this and a few million calculations a second to simulate math prowess.
If you want a computer to solve even the simplest equation you'll often have to roll up your sleeves and force feed it Fermat. However, apply complex logic to a problem, with forked solution trees and heuristics, and it will dance through the xor mine field like a ballet dancer.
When people ask me what programming a computer is most like I immediately liken it to doing proof in geometry. If you can get from point A to point B using nomenclature like "SAS", you're ready for programming.
Calculus is only required because some people like it and math professors get lonely. For 3D coordinate systems you might need it ( though, less than matrix algebra ). However, a solid understanding of logic and diagnostic principals will benefit any programmer.
I'm not sure what issue taken with this is. Everyone who works a regular job is expected to show up on time and stay the duration of the day. Many jobs have some kind of time card system in place to help monitor this. That the system is more automated and exact would only be of concern to those who wish to cheat the system.
I work for a public utility. We had the hand punch system years ago. ( I always threatened to make a rubber hand, but never got around to it. ) Now we have the finger print reader instead. Overall, it tends to help both sides, since employees can often prove they were on site even if their supervisors weren't sure.
As a side note, biometric data can leak. Our finger print database is intentionally stored at a slightly lower resolution than the federal standard. The reason is that if we kept government quality information, we'd be required to surrender a copy of that information to the government. Now that's scary.
C# is basically Java for Windows, take two. It does seem to have learned from the evolution of Java and cleaned some of the messier bits.
Exception handling is a little looser, without the need to declare thrown exceptions or catch those declarations. There is a still an exception based error handling system, it's just more implicit than explicit.
I really like the properties, an idea they took from Visual Basic. At some point in Java history (birth of EBJs?) it was concluded that public class variables were a bad idea. Java standardized on a getter / setter model that is more a convention rather than a language rule. C# uses a property, which has either a get, set, or both. If fills the same OOP niche, only more cleanly.
There is also some neat static ( class level ) functionality. Interestingly, while exceptions aren't explicit, inheritance is. A method must be declared virtual to be overridden, a more C++ thing to do.
Basically, there are many little changes from Java that make C# not Java. But, the changes do make sense and make C# an enjoyable language to program in.
The VB.NET was part of the initial plan. Visual Basic is just one of those things that most Windows programmers are reasonably comfortable with. It's non threatening.
.NET before they see what it entails.
.NET, C# code is more concise and usable than what appears to be legacy VB support. The event support is clean, the class, interface, abstraction architecture is understandable. While none of the MS docs will mention the J word, in many ways C# is Java for Windows. .NET is OO at heart, it makes sense to talk to it in the OO language that was designed for it.
When Visual Studio came in, I did a simple Oracle client app in both VB and C#. The code was pretty much the same between the two projects. However, the differences between VB.NET and plain ole VB are monumental. It's really just a ruse to get stunted VB programmers to buy into
If you're going
I wont say stupid, but probably biased.
.NET can leverage native OS architecture quite efficiently. It simply blows Java Swing away in this area.
I'm a programmer / project manager ( / DBA, etc. ) for a very small shop. We write in house programs for specific industry requirements.
We've done stuff in Java; as an OOP advocate, I love Java. As project manager, I get blank stares from programmers that want the equivalent of visual basic to work in. We've now standardized on C#.NET. The programmers still look a little lost when I emphasize OO practices, but they're real happy with Visual Studio to hold their hands.
So,
Is it faster? Perhaps.
Remember, in a rich client GUI environment,
Is Development Faster ? YES.
Bash them all the you like. Microsoft's development tools have always been good. The Visual Studio suite is much better than any equivalent product I've seen.
Is it cross platform ? No
Yes, a big no here. However, expect to see the CLR running on platforms other than straight up Windows in the future. In the end, when most commercial clients run Windows this is more of a selling point than a detriment.
Does it do things that other languages cannot? No
Well, this can pretty much be said of any language. As a Java programmer, I really enjoy C#, it's does the same thing as Java, it just does it quite well for Windows.
Is it Encumbered By Patents? Yes
So? For OSS this doesn't fly, for the boss, this isn't really a consideration.
> This makes PostgreSQL one step closer to being able to replace Oracle...
Please! While this may help win the hearts and minds of OOS geeks, it does little to improve their standing in the business world.
Oracle is as established in the database world as Microsoft is on the desktop. This alone would doom any OOS wannabe to quiet places like web server back ends where they already do well anyway ( e.g. mySql ).
Put aside the technical considerations, support, client base, etc and PostgreSQL still offers as much of a threat to Oracle as mySql or dBase. The only real threat I've seen to Oracle supremacy is Microsoft's SQL Server but, of course, that's only in MS shops.
Force them to make the decision as to the use of your time. Simply, make them prioritize their own requests.
Ask things like, "is this more important than this other thing you asked me to work on? Which would you like me to work on first?" Say things like, "you understand, this will delay that other item, right?"
When they want both done simultaneously, against all laws of time and space, you must reason calmly for them. Because, chances are, they haven't reasoned out the impact of the request themselves. You must make it clear how this request will change the status of other outstanding request. You should make them tell you precisely what to do and gently tell them the downside of it.
If the person making the request fully understands the gain and loss of putting further strain on a resource, they can make the decision that will make them happiest.
While it's nice that OOS is getting applied in such a high profile venue, I'm afraid "the first Hollywood production" is overstating the matter.
. sh tml
It's been done; I recalled it being pretty big news for Linux enthusiasts at the time:
http://newsforge.com/newsforge/02/04/24/1643238
The supposition of the article entirely ignores the history of innovation.
It assumes that design for a wealthy elite's amusement or comfort is a waste of time. However, many inventions that don't have a military pedigree begin life as a novelty or plaything of the privileged.
Just because the uses of some new technology today seem trivial doesn't mean they wont be extremely useful in the future. Let the early adopters pay for the R & D with their toys. Encourage them to do it! Ultimately their folly might do everyone some good.
You got me all excited for stains? I fail to see how this would imply water. Why not different color strata that get disturbed or shift for any number of reasons? As intriguing as Martian rivers would be, imposing the desire on scant evidence is poor science at best.
When designing a database application the first decision is where the application logic should be stored. In a large database the choice is to store logic in the database or in the application. There are good reasons for both approaches, but mySQL limits you to strictly application logic. While this is not bad and makes most programmers happy, it's also one of the most common causes for inefficient database usage. Most programmers think more in loops than SQL and a loop is the kiss of death for a database. The one undeniable requirement of a database is the ability to filter and return only the data needed for a given operation. Since mySQL does not support sub queries, stored procedures, ref cursors, etc, it simply can't do this. The work around is to pull the required information and analyze it in the application. Again, this is a programming solution that has to be applied because the database is not up to the task. The argument against the big databases is that they offer too many things that folks don't use. This may be true, but the corollary is that there is a large pool of things that I can and will use. I would use mySQL in the same places I'd use MS Access for about the same reasons. This makes it a handy tool for database development and testing. However, I don't think it really qualifies it as an enterprise database or a realistic "threat" to Oracle, DB2, SQL Server, etc.
I thought it was rather concise, actually. Honestly, Cronkite was possibly unbiased and it's been downhill since then. I've given up being annoyed by charged language in national news. You can hardly blame amateurs when so called professionals set such a low standard.