Some even advertise the ease of it (albeit circumspectly) in their advertising
Yep, one of the local ADSL providers here advertising their "advanced" package: "Chatting and downloading a movie or music at the same time? No problem!"
I mean, "downloading a movie", I have never been able to download (as in, completely download, burn and view at a later time) legally.
Some people today simply DO NOT CARE to put forth the effort
Lots of broad, generalizing statements. Those same people might care a lot about their family and visit their brothers and sisters regularly. They may also have a big savings account for an early retirement. Things you may not care about. I'd like to scream to you: "WAKE THE FUCK UP AND STOP MAKING STUPID GENERALIZING STATEMENTS!" at the top of my lungs.
Yes, they used Java. However, your argument was that "[wine] sucks because use Windows conventions for file names, registry settings, paths, menu structure and look and feel". Java in this respect is no different at all. You'll still have to do work on the stuff you mention, except look-and-feel in case of SWT.
Basically you say: wine sucks because of reasons A/B/C/D. Java is better because of reasons A/B/C.
Wine itself isn't an complete or incomplete hack. It's just a library which can be compiled against. IBM has the source so if Wine had to implement hacks in order to support certain calls, IBM could've used workarounds.
- shouldn't be too hard to have the client running on MacOSX, and all Unixes supported by the Eclipse platform (dependending on how much native code they have - I would suspect it not to be that much, as it goes against the decision of using Java + Eclipse).
So basically you're saying that IBM's approach is better because it supports MacOSX and other Unixes? I don't think that was stated in the business case of this project.
After a lot of effort you might be able to hack some of the Windows-ness out of it, but it would be a nightmare to maintain.
Well, obviously they have already dealt with multi-platformness. You think that's a maintenance nightmare as well? Of course not. They probably did their best to isolate the platform-specific stuff and put the rest in separate libs.
This comes severely late, in my opinion. The Wine and the CodeWeavers people have put work into
running Notes on Linux.
IMHO, it would've been better if IBM had put this investment into Wine so
other applications had profited as well. A proper native compilation along
with some polishing for the various desktops could've made this "achievement"
years earlier. Think Google's Picasa, which was nicely ported to
Linux this way, and runs like a charm.
Wikipedia is of course an excellent resource. However I'd wish that people would also have an eye for Wikimedia Commons, a giant multimedia library to which everyone can upload files, all perfectly categorized. More importantly, every file that's in there can be linked to by Wikipedia.
From the help page:
The Wikimedia Commons (or "Commons") is a repository of free images, sound and other multimedia files. Uploaded files can be used as local files by other projects on the Wikimedia servers, including Wikibooks, Wikinews, Wikipedia, Wikisource and Wiktionary.
I was giving an example. My point is that often code reviews go for simple things like indentation and legibility rather than functionality. While all are important, the project can't be finished if not for the latter.
In my experience those end up either as "hurt feelings" slugfests or, just as ineffectively, full of "you should put a space after this brace" comments.
Aye here. I've experienced this a number of times and started thinking about it. Generalizing a bit, most developers who like to do code reviews, like to do all sorts of things throughout a week (set up a build system, do some design, code a module, do some testing). However, these are exactly the same developers who often have trouble with the nitty-gritty details.
Code reviews should be done by developers who hate code reviews, and should be concentrated on the meaning of the code and what could be missing.
Coworker doing a review: "Hm, this function looks a bit big, maybe you should split it."
Me: "OK, good idea. But do you think these 500 lines cover the problem, or have I missed something?"
Coworker: "Umm, it looks OK".
Me: "Well, maybe you should give it some thought?"
Coworker: "I have, and it looks OK. Hey, you have some duplication here."
Et cetera.
Actually, here in the Netherlands, I have spoken to a few businessmen which
deal or have dealt with the US. They all find dealing with the Americans an
enormously bureaucratic process. Also note that lots of rules come from overseas from our point of view,
Sarbanes-Oxley comes to mind.
To start a company in the Netherlands, you do two things:
visit the local Chamber of Commerce and spend 10 minutes to tell your new
business its name
Fill in one (1) form and send it to the (equivalent of the) IRS for a
VAT-number
You're doing this the wrong way. Pouring over code is very useful, but doesn't
show you the layering. So, whip up trusty old gdb, set a breakpoint and
run the damn code. Then use the step and next commands and just
see where this leads you.
It's just a tool, for crying out loud. This article says something about PHP, but we have electronic engineers here using Perl. You want to see their scripts? The code looks like baby poo. But who cares? It's just a tool. And it works. Perl suddenly sucks then?
Of course, the "wizards" will recognize a tool its deficiencies and start using something more appropriate.
Latex with CVS. This is what I use for my documents.
I don't want to sound like a troll, and I love LaTeX just as much as you do, but seriously... LaTeX in the office? I can't even begin to enumerate the problems.
Open up Microsoft Word, type "=rand()" without the quotes and hit enter.
You bastard! When I typed this, my PC froze! But since it's also a server, it rebooted itself, mailed a Nigerian scammer my home address, started a DDOS on the local authorities and blew itself up, taking half of the data center along with it. When I came home, the Nigerian scammer had raped the dog and the cable guy from the ADSL company who had showed up at my house. When I told my wife, she replied that she didn't care since the left me this morning and took the house along.
So thanks to your FUCKING easter egg, I am divorced, broken, homeless and worst of all, WITHOUT AN INTERNET CONNECTION.
Slashdot Mirror
Some even advertise the ease of it (albeit circumspectly) in their advertising
Yep, one of the local ADSL providers here advertising their "advanced" package: "Chatting and downloading a movie or music at the same time? No problem!"
I mean, "downloading a movie", I have never been able to download (as in, completely download, burn and view at a later time) legally.
Then what? I expect a somewhat larger company with lots of online shops has some sort of a SLA for their internet connection.
Some people today simply DO NOT CARE to put forth the effort
Lots of broad, generalizing statements. Those same people might care a lot about their family and visit their brothers and sisters regularly. They may also have a big savings account for an early retirement. Things you may not care about. I'd like to scream to you: "WAKE THE FUCK UP AND STOP MAKING STUPID GENERALIZING STATEMENTS!" at the top of my lungs.
A tremendous amount of work is required for it to be complete, and I don't think they will ever succeed here
Do you run Linux? If so, send me an e-mail and I'll let you try the latest Wine version from CodeWeavers. You'll be amazed.
Yes, they used Java. However, your argument was that "[wine] sucks because use Windows conventions for file names, registry settings, paths, menu structure and look and feel". Java in this respect is no different at all. You'll still have to do work on the stuff you mention, except look-and-feel in case of SWT.
Basically you say: wine sucks because of reasons A/B/C/D. Java is better because of reasons A/B/C.
- it is not a (incomplete) hack like Wine
Wine itself isn't an complete or incomplete hack. It's just a library which can be compiled against. IBM has the source so if Wine had to implement hacks in order to support certain calls, IBM could've used workarounds.
- shouldn't be too hard to have the client running on MacOSX, and all Unixes supported by the Eclipse platform (dependending on how much native code they have - I would suspect it not to be that much, as it goes against the decision of using Java + Eclipse).
So basically you're saying that IBM's approach is better because it supports MacOSX and other Unixes? I don't think that was stated in the business case of this project.
After a lot of effort you might be able to hack some of the Windows-ness out of it, but it would be a nightmare to maintain.
Well, obviously they have already dealt with multi-platformness. You think that's a maintenance nightmare as well? Of course not. They probably did their best to isolate the platform-specific stuff and put the rest in separate libs.
They could still stell it, the Wine library is LGPL licensed.
This comes severely late, in my opinion. The Wine and the CodeWeavers people have put work into running Notes on Linux.
IMHO, it would've been better if IBM had put this investment into Wine so other applications had profited as well. A proper native compilation along with some polishing for the various desktops could've made this "achievement" years earlier. Think Google's Picasa, which was nicely ported to Linux this way, and runs like a charm.
Wikipedia is of course an excellent resource. However I'd wish that people would also have an eye for Wikimedia Commons, a giant multimedia library to which everyone can upload files, all perfectly categorized. More importantly, every file that's in there can be linked to by Wikipedia.
From the help page:
The Wikimedia Commons (or "Commons") is a repository of free images, sound and other multimedia files. Uploaded files can be used as local files by other projects on the Wikimedia servers, including Wikibooks, Wikinews, Wikipedia, Wikisource and Wiktionary.
Tech Support: "OK it must be EITHER the heat sink OR the mousepad."
Customer: "Only the Sith deal in absolutes!"
I was giving an example. My point is that often code reviews go for simple things like indentation and legibility rather than functionality. While all are important, the project can't be finished if not for the latter.
Aye here. I've experienced this a number of times and started thinking about it. Generalizing a bit, most developers who like to do code reviews, like to do all sorts of things throughout a week (set up a build system, do some design, code a module, do some testing). However, these are exactly the same developers who often have trouble with the nitty-gritty details.
Code reviews should be done by developers who hate code reviews, and should be concentrated on the meaning of the code and what could be missing.
Coworker doing a review: "Hm, this function looks a bit big, maybe you should split it."
Me: "OK, good idea. But do you think these 500 lines cover the problem, or have I missed something?"
Coworker: "Umm, it looks OK".
Me: "Well, maybe you should give it some thought?"
Coworker: "I have, and it looks OK. Hey, you have some duplication here."
Et cetera.
... will it run make?
Pictures of your mom?
And your wife agrees with this system?
*dumps gf*
QUICK WHERE DID YOU GET HER??!
Oh NO, even the homeless have Beowulf clusters! Am I the ONLY ONE left on the planet who doesn't run a cluster??
I advise you to:
Well, I was actually comparing apples to oranges it seems. Thanks for noting an actual experience! Why not put the website in your sig, BTW?
Actually, here in the Netherlands, I have spoken to a few businessmen which deal or have dealt with the US. They all find dealing with the Americans an enormously bureaucratic process. Also note that lots of rules come from overseas from our point of view, Sarbanes-Oxley comes to mind.
To start a company in the Netherlands, you do two things:
- visit the local Chamber of Commerce and spend 10 minutes to tell your new
business its name
- Fill in one (1) form and send it to the (equivalent of the) IRS for a
VAT-number
That's it. How unbureaucrative can you get?You're doing this the wrong way. Pouring over code is very useful, but doesn't show you the layering. So, whip up trusty old gdb, set a breakpoint and run the damn code. Then use the step and next commands and just see where this leads you.
Command mode.
Of course, the "wizards" will recognize a tool its deficiencies and start using something more appropriate.
I don't want to sound like a troll, and I love LaTeX just as much as you do, but seriously... LaTeX in the office? I can't even begin to enumerate the problems.
You bastard! When I typed this, my PC froze! But since it's also a server, it rebooted itself, mailed a Nigerian scammer my home address, started a DDOS on the local authorities and blew itself up, taking half of the data center along with it. When I came home, the Nigerian scammer had raped the dog and the cable guy from the ADSL company who had showed up at my house. When I told my wife, she replied that she didn't care since the left me this morning and took the house along.
So thanks to your FUCKING easter egg, I am divorced, broken, homeless and worst of all, WITHOUT AN INTERNET CONNECTION.
Thanks for nothing.