Apple has long strived to merge the concept of the device and the service into one. It's what made the iPod/iTunes combo such a devastatingly effective one.
Are you kidding?? Most iPod owners I know never use iTunes.
They can research all they want, but everyone knows how to make a powerpoint presentation *ahem* "memorable"...
Narrator: that's when you'll catch a flash of Tyler's contribution to the film. [the audience is watching the film, the pornography flashes for a split second]
Narrator: Nobody knows that they saw it, but they did...
Tyler Durden: A nice, big, cock...
I say we introduce the death penalty for cut-and-paste plagiarism. The world would be ruined if this ran loose (OH NOES!). On the other hand, for copy-and-paste plagiarism I feel a stern warning is what's necessary.
You can also choose to request our professional installation service, which dispatches an army of factory-trained, sub-contracted nanobots from the TiSP Access Node. The nanobots travel with exhilarating nano-speed through the sewer system and into your home to perform the installation service, which should be complete within 15 minutes. Note: For your own physical safety and emotional well-being and in consideration of the nanobots' working conditions, please make absolutely certain that your toilet is unoccupied at the scheduled appointment time.
Speak for yourself. I'd *love* a pre-installed Linux. The last 6 years I've been running Linux on the desktop at work and at home, and frankly, I can't see the fun anymore in installation and spending hours to get the last hardware supported.
This is completely besides the point, but wouldn't you consider just resizing the Vista partition? In previous stories, others mentioned trouble with warranties when calling the helpdesk without a working Windows installation.
It would be better, but not radically so. Looking at these numbers and generalizing a bit, it would mean that you would get a 25 percent gain in battery usage.
Windows 2000/me, however, was a terribly mangled and unstable peice of software. XP, in my experience, has been remarkably stable.
I have an Athlon 2800 box running on my desk here. At the time, XP had just come out but this one still had Windows 2000 on it. I never bothered to upgrade: it never hangs on this particular configuration and the box isnt used to play games. For me, Win 2k is perfectly fine.
Of course I'm kidding. I thought GP a little arrogant just because he doesn't like to watch TV. I don't either, but then again I'm not labelling people who do.
if you won't consider bug fixes, keep the damn thing to yourself
I'd rather everyone released their code. I can sort it out just fine. Somehow, good projects have a habit of floating up. If it's not a good project, then we can perhaps rip stuff out, or see how it's not to be done.
The days of going to work in the dark and leaving in the dark weigh heavy on the soul/psyche
Sounds like you should get one of those 10.000 lumen lamps, like this one. Put it on your desk, be scorned by coworkers for a week and then enjoy a better mood.
The only thing that bothers me here is that on many consumer offers, companies FORCE you to get OEM Vista with a new PC.
Then don't buy a consumer offering. When visiting for example Dell's site, pick 'small business' and the first option for a Dimension is either XP or Vista.
Suppose I create software for one team (two to five persons). Or for a department (up to twenty persons). Does the lowering of customer defects still translate to big bucks? A bit, but not by the thousands.
I'm getting a bit tired of hearing "YOU MUST DO UNIT TESTING OR THE XP CABAL WILL COME AND RAPE YOUR DOG". The Wikipedia article reads like a goddamn advertisement. I'm not against it, I'm just pointing out that there are situations where it's a lot less useful.
[smugness level="high"]Really ridiculous, the situations you Americans are in. We Dutchies have it much better:-) We get IRS-developed software for Windows, Linux and Mac OS, built with wxWidgets.[/smugness]
Thank you for an excellent reply, with some excellent points. I've put you on my friends list, so I'll see your future posts with a +5 friend modifier. Anyway:
If you say there are many projects that don't require that kind of quality, how about giving some examples.
I was talking about the brunt of the custom developed applications that are really specialized front-ends for databases. Actually, I'm of the opinion that automatic testing of most user interfaces could be done much faster, cheaper and better by a human with a test plan.
If you're talking about libraries, hardware interfacing or the like, then I'd say yeah, these are suitable candidates for a large flock of unit tests.
Right, cost and time issues. Sure, it makes development potentially twice as long therefore twice the cost, but wouldn't not having customers coming back saying the code doesn't work, or it broke, translate into savings?
That's a difficult decision and it needs to be checked for each and every project. However, I dare say that the decision to not create unit tests (which is equal to not deciding anything) is made much more often. And why? Because the costs are not worth it. I have some experience with maintaining a suite of unit tests and I found the following: the more tests, the larger the maintenance work. The older the tests, the less useful they are.
Tests are the most useful when they find bugs. That's what tests are for. When tests are repeated, as in regression testing, their usefulness slowly diminishes. So at one point, you might decide that the tests aren't worth maintaining. And I find that people often forget the cost and especially the discipline involved.
Slashdot Mirror
They can research all they want, but everyone knows how to make a powerpoint presentation *ahem* "memorable"...
Narrator: that's when you'll catch a flash of Tyler's contribution to the film.
[the audience is watching the film, the pornography flashes for a split second]
Narrator: Nobody knows that they saw it, but they did...
Tyler Durden: A nice, big, cock...
I say we introduce the death penalty for cut-and-paste plagiarism. The world would be ruined if this ran loose (OH NOES!). On the other hand, for copy-and-paste plagiarism I feel a stern warning is what's necessary.
Fuck the R I - double A
Fuck the M P - double A
Fuck the suits in the BSA
Fuck 'em all for the DMCA
Speak for yourself. I'd *love* a pre-installed Linux. The last 6 years I've been running Linux on the desktop at work and at home, and frankly, I can't see the fun anymore in installation and spending hours to get the last hardware supported.
This is completely besides the point, but wouldn't you consider just resizing the Vista partition? In previous stories, others mentioned trouble with warranties when calling the helpdesk without a working Windows installation.
This also goes for Wikipedia and many more website, although you're right that it looks kind of funny on MS.
Hmmz in my drunken stupor I must've forgotten The Drink Of The Gods
Of course I'm kidding. I thought GP a little arrogant just because he doesn't like to watch TV. I don't either, but then again I'm not labelling people who do.
Suppose I create software for one team (two to five persons). Or for a department (up to twenty persons). Does the lowering of customer defects still translate to big bucks? A bit, but not by the thousands.
I'm getting a bit tired of hearing "YOU MUST DO UNIT TESTING OR THE XP CABAL WILL COME AND RAPE YOUR DOG". The Wikipedia article reads like a goddamn advertisement. I'm not against it, I'm just pointing out that there are situations where it's a lot less useful.
[smugness level="high"]Really ridiculous, the situations you Americans are in. We Dutchies have it much better :-) We get IRS-developed software for Windows, Linux and Mac OS, built with wxWidgets.[/smugness]
If you're talking about libraries, hardware interfacing or the like, then I'd say yeah, these are suitable candidates for a large flock of unit tests. That's a difficult decision and it needs to be checked for each and every project. However, I dare say that the decision to not create unit tests (which is equal to not deciding anything) is made much more often. And why? Because the costs are not worth it. I have some experience with maintaining a suite of unit tests and I found the following: the more tests, the larger the maintenance work. The older the tests, the less useful they are.
Tests are the most useful when they find bugs. That's what tests are for. When tests are repeated, as in regression testing, their usefulness slowly diminishes. So at one point, you might decide that the tests aren't worth maintaining. And I find that people often forget the cost and especially the discipline involved.