But how many designers did NOT code for Firefox/Safari?
I create websites, and test primarily in Internet Explorer. Then I go through with Firefox and Safari to 'fix' anything that didn't work. Then I go back through with IE to make sure it is still okay (rinse, repeat).
I am too lazy to use IE hacks, so I end up with code that is 'current standards' compliant. Admittedly, it may not always look the same in the two browsers, but it is always usable.
I'm not worried about any additional work for the new version of IE. I'm just excited about maybe being able to use minwidth- that would be great.
It's that.00001% (I think you had too many nines) that makes it interesting.
But I agree, most of it is repetitive. Every time I start a new project, I think, "Oh crap, I have to do this AGAIN!?!?"
I try to create tools for re-use, and I love when it works, but many times I just have to slog through the same stuff that makes up most of the project, before I can get through the things that make it unique. (I mean, how many times do I need to List all items/edit one item/update said item?)
Oh well, they pay me for both. So if I can do some of my job with my eyes closed, then so be it. Because I can do it so much quicker, it just gives me more time to do the interesting parts that I enjoy.
But I would challenge you- or most other people here on Slashdot- to create a new web application in the language of your choice faster than I (or any good ColdFusion programmer) can in ColdFusion.
I've been working with ColdFusion for almost 10 years. I can do everything 'from scratch', but at the same time I love using all of the new features they have been adding. With functionality for ZIP files, great image functions, PDF functions, charting, etc. etc. etc. I can do what I need to without using any 3rd party add-ons.
The new AJAX functionality is also awesome and so is the XML/RSS support.
Sorry I enjoy using a language that is designed for exactly what I do, and does it well. It just makes sense to me.
Looking at your history, we can see that you work at a help-desk. Installing software is a big victory for you.
Are you the new vanguard of Slashdot? Tech-support?
Remind me to tell you about the new features of the enterprise-wide applications I've rolled out. You'll be teaching the secretaries how to use it next week.
As I mentioned above, a perfect alpha geek example would be Rob Malda.
Yes, he supports the Open Source route- but the people who can use the tools, and can create web sites, are the ones who can influence others.
How do most people form their opinions about the world? They read/watch news and get their ideas from there.
Journalists are powerful people.
Imagine a world where people can use tools on their computer to communicate their ideas with the rest of the world. Those people would be influential...and we would call this place, 'The Internet'.
I use Dreamweaver for most of the day, 5 days a week. I looked for something close to equivalent that I could install under Ubuntu- there was nothing.
Dreamweaver has great site management tools. It has built-in SFTP, it has great code hints. It will tell me when I've forgotten to close a quote.
I use it as a text editor, I use the design mode just to orient myself on a page. But there is not any other text editor out there that does such a great job with HTML/CSS/Scripting languages.
No offense to you at all, but I run across a lot of web coders who try to be cool and say, "I do all of my work in a plain text editor." I don't see it as cool, I see it as someone who has no idea what they are missing.
I've been doing web programming/coding for 9 years professionally. I could hand-code everything if I wanted to. I could also walk 7 miles to work each day, but I prefer to use a more efficient method.
First, since I am talking about the suite of Adobe programs specifically used by 'web people' then I am talking about a limited group.
But in the world of computing- where people get their information via the web, that can be a very influential group. They may be the alpha geeks who help others make choices.
But using your example, there are about 4 things I can think of that are killing Ubuntu's chances on becoming my primary OS.
When I click on a PSD file, it doesn't open Photoshop. When I click on an HTML file, it doesn't open Dreamweaver. When I click on an EPS file, it doesn't open Illustrator. When I click on a PNG file, it doesn't open Fireworks.
That's it. If those 4 problems can be fixed, a lot more people would be able to convert.
I ask because you say it, "often has a very large positive impact."
I guess I am oldschool, where I want a job that I can stick with, and grow. I've been with the same organization for 10 years. I've had two interviews- one when I joined, and one when I changed departments.
I hear a lot about people moving jobs frequently, but where I am people generally stick around like they are glued to their chairs. Do you like moving around? Just curious.
The machines we use, the operating systems we use, and the devices we use don't matter... the ability to read others' documents and data is the key.
Exactly, I agree 100%. And until recently, cross-platform access to data was very difficult. That is why it was so critical that such a huge majority of users were on the same platform.
Prior to Microsoft's dominance (and largely as a result of it) there were no 'standard' file formats. Everything was tied to a vendor, and the vendors were happy. Did you ever try to put your 5.25 Apple disk into ANY other drive? It didn't work.
It was not until the industry rallied AGAINST Microsoft, that the idea of standards really came into play. Once they knew they weren't going to beat Microsoft head to head, they decided to take a different tack- 'standards'.
My point is that the dominance of a single company had two beneficial results:
Result 1- in the early stages, computers could interact, because they were homogenous.
Result 2- the industry realizes that instead of allowing one company to hold the keys to everything, they need to make interoperable standards allowing computers to interact.
Plumbing fittings, electrical current, railroads, computers...without a ubiquitous standard, we would never have gotten as far as we are now. Those standards come from industry down a twisty road. Microsoft has played a huge part in making this happen in computing.
The monopoly/homogenous position that Microsoft held was necessary for computing to move forward.
The days of wondering which platform to use were gone. No more CP/M vs. Apple arguments. You could buy a Windows computer, and know that the software you purchased would run on it.
This is what allowed shrink-wrapped software to explode into a huge industry. If you remember going into a computer store in the 90's, the Windows software section was enormous. The Mac section was tiny- and there was nothing else. That very 'lack of choice' is exactly what made computing mainstream.
Now that the internet age is upon us, the platform is no longer important. With an internet connection and browser, most people can achieve everything they need on their computer.
But without Microsoft, computing would not have been brought to the masses. And without the masses, there wouldn't be thousands of 18 year old girls showing their titties on webcams.
so they can destroy that just like they wrecked personal and business computing
That comment is so wrong, it's incredible.
If there is one single company that moved personal and business computing forward, it is Microsoft.
Say what you want about their interface, their ethics, whatever...no company has done more to move businesses and individuals onto computers than Microsoft.
The fact that 90% of the computers in the world run Windows should tell you something about their influence.
Not discounting your opinion...because you are right, a lot of FPS are not sandboxy.
But I for one do not like sandbox games. I would much rather have a shooter with a *few* options, but a lot of set-piece battles. Rainbow Six Vegas was a perfect example of this. It could not be done as a sandbox game, yet it was an incredible single player experience.
To me, saying that every game should be a sandbox game is like saying every game should be first person. A lot of RTS players would disagree very strongly with that.
I've got a Google Search Appliance (the hardware/software combo to have a personal Google search). The interface is so bad, I can't believe it was made by a software company.
I run Adsense/Adwords- the interface for that is also atrocious.
Just from those quick examples, I can say that I do *not* welcome our new Google application developer overlords.
I'll give you Guitar Hero III- not as good as II...except that the song selection was pretty darn good. And yes, the boss battle thing was pretty stupid. But at the heart of it (You know you rocked out on Barracuda!) it is still a pretty fun game.
But I don't agree with you at all on Call of Duty.
Call of Duty 2 was a fantastic game. The single play was a lot of fun, and multiplayer was fantastic, especially for a console launch title. Yes, it took a while to get the bugs out, but they DID get the bugs out, rather than telling us, "We'll fix that in the next version."
Call of Duty 3 was okay. Not as good as 2...almost like they phoned it in.
But Call of Duty 4- man, if you really want to say that is the same game, then you are just saying, "I've seen the screen shots, and it looks similar." Because it is a HUGE step forward in online shooters.
What about the challenges, and the progression of your 'character'? Leveling up, gaining new weapons, etc etc? Some of it has been done- Rainbow Six Vegas - but it has never been done so well in a shooter.
At at the risk of sounding like an insufferable asshat (Starayo) - Medal of Honor is an EA game. I'm sure you know, but I just don't want anyone to think it is associated with Activision.
I'm not expecting the same from DX2, but I am from DX3.
Wise choice.
I played DX2. I thought it was okay, but it only reached about 50% of the potential.
I did enjoy it though- the worst part for me were the frequent stops in the game for loading new areas on the map. Sometimes it would be 3 or 4 loads just to run around the map looking for something, then 3 or 4 loads to get back.
In my opinion if the first game was a 10 (I agree, it was the first game I considered to be 'art'), then the second one was a 7.5.
Slashdot Mirror
But how many designers did NOT code for Firefox/Safari?
I create websites, and test primarily in Internet Explorer. Then I go through with Firefox and Safari to 'fix' anything that didn't work. Then I go back through with IE to make sure it is still okay (rinse, repeat).
I am too lazy to use IE hacks, so I end up with code that is 'current standards' compliant. Admittedly, it may not always look the same in the two browsers, but it is always usable.
I'm not worried about any additional work for the new version of IE. I'm just excited about maybe being able to use minwidth- that would be great.
They were the first to put a hard-drive in a game console.
Bastard- your linked video IS the derivative of this video, not the source.
This video on Slashtube was an awesome. One of the few where I could be a backup dancer.
It's that.00001% (I think you had too many nines) that makes it interesting.
But I agree, most of it is repetitive. Every time I start a new project, I think, "Oh crap, I have to do this AGAIN!?!?"
I try to create tools for re-use, and I love when it works, but many times I just have to slog through the same stuff that makes up most of the project, before I can get through the things that make it unique. (I mean, how many times do I need to List all items/edit one item/update said item?)
Oh well, they pay me for both. So if I can do some of my job with my eyes closed, then so be it. Because I can do it so much quicker, it just gives me more time to do the interesting parts that I enjoy.
You're a tool.
If you don't like ColdFusion, don't use it.
But I would challenge you- or most other people here on Slashdot- to create a new web application in the language of your choice faster than I (or any good ColdFusion programmer) can in ColdFusion.
I've been working with ColdFusion for almost 10 years. I can do everything 'from scratch', but at the same time I love using all of the new features they have been adding. With functionality for ZIP files, great image functions, PDF functions, charting, etc. etc. etc. I can do what I need to without using any 3rd party add-ons.
The new AJAX functionality is also awesome and so is the XML/RSS support.
Sorry I enjoy using a language that is designed for exactly what I do, and does it well. It just makes sense to me.
As someone who uses ColdFusion all the time...I have to say, YES! On the chart! Whoo-Hoo!
No worry that it is below ADA, the important thing is that it is ON THE CHART!
Okay, have your laugh now. But I still think it is good.
Looking at your history, we can see that you work at a help-desk. Installing software is a big victory for you.
Are you the new vanguard of Slashdot? Tech-support?
Remind me to tell you about the new features of the enterprise-wide applications I've rolled out. You'll be teaching the secretaries how to use it next week.
As I mentioned above, a perfect alpha geek example would be Rob Malda.
Yes, he supports the Open Source route- but the people who can use the tools, and can create web sites, are the ones who can influence others.
How do most people form their opinions about the world? They read/watch news and get their ideas from there.
Journalists are powerful people.
Imagine a world where people can use tools on their computer to communicate their ideas with the rest of the world. Those people would be influential...and we would call this place, 'The Internet'.
Here- I'll throw out the name of an 'alpha geek' who uses software similar to what I described earlier: Rob Malda.
I was not just referring to 'web designers', but to people who create new sites.
I use Dreamweaver for most of the day, 5 days a week. I looked for something close to equivalent that I could install under Ubuntu- there was nothing.
Dreamweaver has great site management tools. It has built-in SFTP, it has great code hints. It will tell me when I've forgotten to close a quote.
I use it as a text editor, I use the design mode just to orient myself on a page. But there is not any other text editor out there that does such a great job with HTML/CSS/Scripting languages.
No offense to you at all, but I run across a lot of web coders who try to be cool and say, "I do all of my work in a plain text editor." I don't see it as cool, I see it as someone who has no idea what they are missing.
I've been doing web programming/coding for 9 years professionally. I could hand-code everything if I wanted to. I could also walk 7 miles to work each day, but I prefer to use a more efficient method.
Let me add...
'A lot' of people here means two things.
First, since I am talking about the suite of Adobe programs specifically used by 'web people' then I am talking about a limited group.
But in the world of computing- where people get their information via the web, that can be a very influential group. They may be the alpha geeks who help others make choices.
I like Ubuntu a lot.
But using your example, there are about 4 things I can think of that are killing Ubuntu's chances on becoming my primary OS.
When I click on a PSD file, it doesn't open Photoshop.
When I click on an HTML file, it doesn't open Dreamweaver.
When I click on an EPS file, it doesn't open Illustrator.
When I click on a PNG file, it doesn't open Fireworks.
That's it. If those 4 problems can be fixed, a lot more people would be able to convert.
How many interviews are you going to?
I ask because you say it, "often has a very large positive impact."
I guess I am oldschool, where I want a job that I can stick with, and grow. I've been with the same organization for 10 years. I've had two interviews- one when I joined, and one when I changed departments.
I hear a lot about people moving jobs frequently, but where I am people generally stick around like they are glued to their chairs. Do you like moving around? Just curious.
"Don't tase me bro, don't tase me!"
The machines we use, the operating systems we use, and the devices we use don't matter... the ability to read others' documents and data is the key.
Exactly, I agree 100%. And until recently, cross-platform access to data was very difficult. That is why it was so critical that such a huge majority of users were on the same platform.
Prior to Microsoft's dominance (and largely as a result of it) there were no 'standard' file formats. Everything was tied to a vendor, and the vendors were happy. Did you ever try to put your 5.25 Apple disk into ANY other drive? It didn't work.
It was not until the industry rallied AGAINST Microsoft, that the idea of standards really came into play. Once they knew they weren't going to beat Microsoft head to head, they decided to take a different tack- 'standards'.
My point is that the dominance of a single company had two beneficial results:
Result 1- in the early stages, computers could interact, because they were homogenous.
Result 2- the industry realizes that instead of allowing one company to hold the keys to everything, they need to make interoperable standards allowing computers to interact.
Plumbing fittings, electrical current, railroads, computers...without a ubiquitous standard, we would never have gotten as far as we are now. Those standards come from industry down a twisty road. Microsoft has played a huge part in making this happen in computing.
The monopoly/homogenous position that Microsoft held was necessary for computing to move forward.
The days of wondering which platform to use were gone. No more CP/M vs. Apple arguments. You could buy a Windows computer, and know that the software you purchased would run on it.
This is what allowed shrink-wrapped software to explode into a huge industry. If you remember going into a computer store in the 90's, the Windows software section was enormous. The Mac section was tiny- and there was nothing else. That very 'lack of choice' is exactly what made computing mainstream.
Now that the internet age is upon us, the platform is no longer important. With an internet connection and browser, most people can achieve everything they need on their computer.
But without Microsoft, computing would not have been brought to the masses. And without the masses, there wouldn't be thousands of 18 year old girls showing their titties on webcams.
so they can destroy that just like they wrecked personal and business computing
That comment is so wrong, it's incredible.
If there is one single company that moved personal and business computing forward, it is Microsoft.
Say what you want about their interface, their ethics, whatever...no company has done more to move businesses and individuals onto computers than Microsoft.
The fact that 90% of the computers in the world run Windows should tell you something about their influence.
Not discounting your opinion...because you are right, a lot of FPS are not sandboxy.
But I for one do not like sandbox games. I would much rather have a shooter with a *few* options, but a lot of set-piece battles. Rainbow Six Vegas was a perfect example of this. It could not be done as a sandbox game, yet it was an incredible single player experience.
To me, saying that every game should be a sandbox game is like saying every game should be first person. A lot of RTS players would disagree very strongly with that.
No, he's not right. He's a retard. (And an anonymous coward, so I can call him whatever I want.)
Halo is a good series. Not fantastic. Sometimes great, but always at least good.
If it weren't for Call of Duty 4 being a better game, Halo 3 would be the best console online-shooter available.
Google makes an incredible search engine.
They also make a LOT of crappy software.
I've got a Google Search Appliance (the hardware/software combo to have a personal Google search). The interface is so bad, I can't believe it was made by a software company.
I run Adsense/Adwords- the interface for that is also atrocious.
Just from those quick examples, I can say that I do *not* welcome our new Google application developer overlords.
I'm not sure if by '100% Microsoft powered solution' you mean that EVERYTHING, including the content, needs to be Microsoft powered...
But there are tons of places using Windows Server/IIS/ASP/SQL Server to run their sites, business, etc. There is nothing wrong with it.
It's almost like they were meant to work together.
I'll give you Guitar Hero III- not as good as II...except that the song selection was pretty darn good. And yes, the boss battle thing was pretty stupid. But at the heart of it (You know you rocked out on Barracuda!) it is still a pretty fun game.
But I don't agree with you at all on Call of Duty.
Call of Duty 2 was a fantastic game. The single play was a lot of fun, and multiplayer was fantastic, especially for a console launch title. Yes, it took a while to get the bugs out, but they DID get the bugs out, rather than telling us, "We'll fix that in the next version."
Call of Duty 3 was okay. Not as good as 2...almost like they phoned it in.
But Call of Duty 4- man, if you really want to say that is the same game, then you are just saying, "I've seen the screen shots, and it looks similar." Because it is a HUGE step forward in online shooters.
What about the challenges, and the progression of your 'character'? Leveling up, gaining new weapons, etc etc? Some of it has been done- Rainbow Six Vegas - but it has never been done so well in a shooter.
Take a look at Game Informer's review.
Most people here won't read that, but let me give you the last line:
Infinity Ward has delivered on every front, and there is no question in my mind that this is the best action shooter that I have ever played.
Sure, you don't like Game Informer...but read the other reviews out there. This is NOT just more of the same.
Well, I cancelled my pre-order on that one. Saw the crappy reviews.
BUT- 'Super Nazis' can work!
Don't forget about these guys from Return to Castle Wolfenstein.
At at the risk of sounding like an insufferable asshat (Starayo) - Medal of Honor is an EA game. I'm sure you know, but I just don't want anyone to think it is associated with Activision.
It seems like there are Blizzard fans here who are not familiar with the type of stuff that Activison is putting out.
Call of Duty and Guitar Hero are two of the highest rated game series being made right now- and two of the best.
Personally, I hope Blizzard doesn't try to put trolls into the next installation of Call of Duty.
I'm not expecting the same from DX2, but I am from DX3.
Wise choice.
I played DX2. I thought it was okay, but it only reached about 50% of the potential.
I did enjoy it though- the worst part for me were the frequent stops in the game for loading new areas on the map. Sometimes it would be 3 or 4 loads just to run around the map looking for something, then 3 or 4 loads to get back.
In my opinion if the first game was a 10 (I agree, it was the first game I considered to be 'art'), then the second one was a 7.5.