A lot of webpages have memory leaks. They keep loading stuff and never unloading it.
And that's not even talking about the 'infinite scroll' pages like Pinterest.
Hawaiians spontaneously gave up their religion in 1819, before the arrival of western missionaries. It seems a lot of them really didn't like the kapu system.
There are still superstitions in Hawaii but mainly revolving around ghosts.
In Mozilla's (and Google's) case that would definitely be the advertisers, they are the ones paying the bills. These 'upgrades' seem to be for their exclusive benefit.
TBH I don't even know what differences there are between Mozilla/Chrome/Safari compared to a year ago. The UI has moved around a bit, but mostly they seem the same (some people have complained about feature removal, but it hasn't affected me).
I was wondering that, so I searched and apparently Mozilla has a QA team, and they even have a blog. Morale seems to be good, they even send members of their team to conferences......
Well yes, if it weren't, then I'd be typing to you right now from my computer that is two orders of magnitude faster than my current computer. Which would be beautiful.
When I manage, if I don't know what someone is working on, I go and ask them personally. I don't need to waste everyone else's time in a status meeting to discover that. Generally I know what everyone is working on (because I either assigned it to them or they let me know). If someone is going to have trouble getting something done on time, I expect them to tell me immediately, not wait until a status meeting.
Status meetings are especially a waste of time when you have a status tracker. Why do I need to wait in a meeting while everyone announces their status, when that information is already contained in the status tracker??
If a group embraces the terminology of the most popular 'process', it's probably bad. In other words, most teams are bad and use whatever is most popularized as a stand in, and tend to act however they want, but pay lipservice to the popular process to make themselves look like they are following industry best practices.
Yes, and instead of giving them a new process (which will fix nothing), it would be more effective to train them to be better programmers. Focus on the individuals, not the process.
people try to throw something together to talk about in scrum.
Thanks. You just reminded me of the months I've spent sitting in pointless 'standups' waiting while people say mindless things to other people who aren't listening. Good times.
Yeap. Let it be a lesson to any software development team: every time you write a line of code, or add a feature, or remove a feature, ask yourself: "Does this feature clearly make the product better?"
If you answer no to that question too often (or if an unbiased observer would answer no), then you'll just be pushing things around haphazardly, like Google (and more likely you'll be making things worse).
Ever since Mythical Man Month came out, there has been plenty of focus on managing programmers, on how to improve managers (which isn't necessarily bad, and MMM is a great book).
The end result is that sometimes programmers run around like mindless monkeys, following process, and trying to figure out what is wrong with their process and what change they need to make to make things better.
In reality, it's not the process, if you want a good team and a good product, you need to focus on improving the programmers: the process is secondary. The best Agile proponents actually do focus on improving the skill of the team, but too many of the consultants out there are focused on process, process, process,, which leads to mindless monkeys.
But getting back to MMM, Fred Brooks pointed out that unless you have a giant team, the exact processes you use are kind of irrelevant.
How can you possibly know if that is a tough schedule or not, without knowing what they are going to put into each release?
Release cadence is like a CPU clock speed.....it tells you nothing unless you know how much work is done during each cycle.
btw, the failure the other night was downtime for four hours, so that brings their uptime down to 3 9s, even if they don't have any more downtime for the rest of the year (which they seem to have every night).
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of webpages have memory leaks. They keep loading stuff and never unloading it.
And that's not even talking about the 'infinite scroll' pages like Pinterest.
It might be coming back.
Another victory of religion and superstition
Hawaiians spontaneously gave up their religion in 1819, before the arrival of western missionaries. It seems a lot of them really didn't like the kapu system.
There are still superstitions in Hawaii but mainly revolving around ghosts.
In forums, sometimes they're the idiot, sometimes I'm the idiot.
I think you need to calm down, man.
In Mozilla's (and Google's) case that would definitely be the advertisers, they are the ones paying the bills. These 'upgrades' seem to be for their exclusive benefit.
TBH I don't even know what differences there are between Mozilla/Chrome/Safari compared to a year ago. The UI has moved around a bit, but mostly they seem the same (some people have complained about feature removal, but it hasn't affected me).
I was wondering that, so I searched and apparently Mozilla has a QA team, and they even have a blog. Morale seems to be good, they even send members of their team to conferences......
Also interesting, but also a lab project.
Well yes, if it weren't, then I'd be typing to you right now from my computer that is two orders of magnitude faster than my current computer. Which would be beautiful.
When I manage, if I don't know what someone is working on, I go and ask them personally. I don't need to waste everyone else's time in a status meeting to discover that. Generally I know what everyone is working on (because I either assigned it to them or they let me know). If someone is going to have trouble getting something done on time, I expect them to tell me immediately, not wait until a status meeting.
Status meetings are especially a waste of time when you have a status tracker. Why do I need to wait in a meeting while everyone announces their status, when that information is already contained in the status tracker??
Better for your customers, of course. They're the ones who pay the bills.
If a group embraces the terminology of the most popular 'process', it's probably bad. In other words, most teams are bad and use whatever is most popularized as a stand in, and tend to act however they want, but pay lipservice to the popular process to make themselves look like they are following industry best practices.
Yes, and instead of giving them a new process (which will fix nothing), it would be more effective to train them to be better programmers. Focus on the individuals, not the process.
A surge protective device doesn't do anything when power is running at 300V for a few seconds.
Seriously? Is that actually a problem is some parts of the world?
Brendan Eich, then working for Nestcape now still at Mozilla, defined created and demoed the first version of Javascript in ten days.
And it shows. The web would have been better if he'd spent a little more time thinking about it.
people try to throw something together to talk about in scrum.
Thanks. You just reminded me of the months I've spent sitting in pointless 'standups' waiting while people say mindless things to other people who aren't listening. Good times.
Yeap. Let it be a lesson to any software development team: every time you write a line of code, or add a feature, or remove a feature, ask yourself: "Does this feature clearly make the product better?"
If you answer no to that question too often (or if an unbiased observer would answer no), then you'll just be pushing things around haphazardly, like Google (and more likely you'll be making things worse).
Sounds like you've been subjected to a lot of miserable software managers over the years.......
Ever since Mythical Man Month came out, there has been plenty of focus on managing programmers, on how to improve managers (which isn't necessarily bad, and MMM is a great book).
The end result is that sometimes programmers run around like mindless monkeys, following process, and trying to figure out what is wrong with their process and what change they need to make to make things better.
In reality, it's not the process, if you want a good team and a good product, you need to focus on improving the programmers: the process is secondary. The best Agile proponents actually do focus on improving the skill of the team, but too many of the consultants out there are focused on process, process, process,, which leads to mindless monkeys.
But getting back to MMM, Fred Brooks pointed out that unless you have a giant team, the exact processes you use are kind of irrelevant.
How can you possibly know if that is a tough schedule or not, without knowing what they are going to put into each release?
Release cadence is like a CPU clock speed.....it tells you nothing unless you know how much work is done during each cycle.
"We do not have 600GHz transistors"
We have faster transistors man
btw, the failure the other night was downtime for four hours, so that brings their uptime down to 3 9s, even if they don't have any more downtime for the rest of the year (which they seem to have every night).
Most people clone a repository before they start working on it......and you can clone it from your coworkers, too.
"Social Darwinism: The Computer Science Episode."
Well, I like git more too, but some people really do prefer CVS.
It isn't practical or reasonable if you extend it all the way out to the extremes.....The reason your heuristic is usually true......
Yup. That's why it's a heuristic, because it's usually true. If it were always true, it would be a law, not a heuristic.
"Onboarding" via training is a waste of time. Hire them on a probationary period.
You can try that, but you'll have trouble hiring good people because good programmers won't be willing to submit to that.