And his second reaction was probably along the lines of "Oh, only you can't see much in/proc can you? And were is the C compiler? Or 'top'? And why haven't I got any virtual terminals... Solaris is sure missing a lot, huh?"
At least, that is how I feel whenever I have to stoop to using Solaris on my work's systems. They are devoutly Sun (or, at least irrationally fearful of Linux/AIX/HPUX/SCO or anything != Sun/IBM/Microsoft). The number of hours I've wasted writing some hack for ps when I could have just grabbed files out of/proc on Linux is depressing.
I'm sure my company likes to assure itself that it is a Sun partner and somehow this will get it all the support it needs... Not that it ever comes in time, helps much or solves any problems we have. Oh well.
Yeah, but how many of their findings will be able to be deployed outside M$? They are patenting everything that they can. You know, now that you can patent your "methods and concepts" and all. I'll bet not one discovery made by the M$ research department can be deployed without paying a for a patent licence.
Come to think of it, how much of their research dept is just researching current trends from competitors and racing to the USPTO to file a patent before the actual inventor can?
It's a legitimate Trademark condition. If this were a story about Red Hat chasing people for abuse of the fedora logo, or about Apple chasing people over the word Macintosh then everyone would be saying "so what?"
Well, it's the same deal here, folks. If you want to use "Linux" (which is a Trademark of Linus Torvalds, for years now) to promote your business, you must register for permission. It is reasonable to pay a fee too, though that's not being asked for yet
What we probably want is a way to refer to "GNU/Linux" systems without using the Linux word. But then nobody would know what we're talking about. Well, that's business.
Nothing about Trademarks prevents you using the word "Linux" for non-promotional stuff (which is what most/.ers would be doing).
Bah, let them. I don't want to copy their shitty products anyway. If I have a family member who buys something from EMI Records, etc and it won't play in their equipment any more, I'll encourage them to return the defective product.
I will and I have. Mainstream mass-media sucks, appart from a few groups, anyway.
try visiting some net labels. You can find a lot of legal / legit sites listed at archive.org. Some I like are Kahvi Collective and Thinnerism although Thinner seems to prefer IE browsers and MP3 over Ogg, but you can work around it. The pieces are Creative Commons licenced, so it's free, but if you like these groups, consider donatingthem some money.
If you're not into techno, Thinner's sister label AutoPlate is good too.
Net labels are the way of the future. I've considered entering the music business, and from what I am seeing, media groups like RIAA / ARIA offer no market advantage over the Net now, and frankly I reckon I can make more money and get at least as wide a distribution without a corporate music label's help, thanks very much.
As for mainstreme penetration of music into the Net, RIAA and Apple are doing a grand job of advertising the fact that you can get music off the Net, thanks.
Now it is up to more musicians to shurk the big music companies that only serve to rip you off (witness complaints by Michael Jackson, Prince and others over their own deals). Get on the net, distribute your tracks yourself and be free -- you may even make a living in your own lifetime.
Actually, only in NSW are there permanent cameras with sign posts. So if you get caught in NSW, then yes, you're and idiot.
In Tasmania, the cameras are inside unmarked police cars, or camoflaged (sp?) in bushes on the road side and you can't see them. No signs to warn you.
You just don't speed, if you can help it. But then there are the set-ups (at bottom of a hill, or a crest, say) where it's natural to increase speed without noticing, unless you pay close attention to your dashboard instead of the road ahead....
Actually, it can be that hard.
I have been booked because my speed crept over the limit on a downward grade, where a radar gun in an unmarked police car was waiting. This car was on the side of the road, not well off, and I was watching it, rather than watching the needle on my speedometer. What I was doing (speeding) was arguably safer than had I kept my eyes glued to my dash while this car potentially pulled out in front.
I could have slowed, yes, but there was also a road train right up my arse.
Premier, After Effects: try Jahshaka (jahshaka.org), which looks suspiciously similar to the effects tools used by Peter Jackson's Weta Digital team.
Also CinePaint (a high-bitdepth version of GIMP) is written by and widely used by the big movie studio pros, for whom Photoshop doesn't cut it.
Not to mention linux farms (getting a little closer to the original topic) used by ILM for Star Wars II and III (and Weta use these too). Duh.
For sound studio work, really serious stuff, who uses PCs anyway? Amiga maybe, or propper DSP equipment. I find JACK on Linux to be okay if you really heavily tweak it (or hack the kernel). But if you are using a general purpose PC, then you're screwed whatever OS you run -- they just don't cut it on the latency. Oh, unless you are a "live performance" DJ and have everything pre-mixed...
And yes, you can even spend money and commercial product running on Linux if you want. I would prefer that to having to pay for every Windoze seat and hoping I don't get a BSOD, or having to wait for Windoze to stop swapping so I can have my frigging mouse back (a problem I currently have right now at work).
Well, yes I agree with this, and also no, I don't.
I recall my parents and teachers having similar arguments when my highshool considered introducing scientific calculators to the maths and science classes... At that time these devices cost about $120, which was a fair amount to spend on a 7th-grader in 1987 -- you could get 3 good maths text books for that money!
There were concerns that us pupils would lose the ability to do arithmetic in our heads and not be able to count change at shops, etc. Also there was concern of cheating on tests and exams.
The same argument of a loss of imagination and creativity could also be made about television, by the way. And with today's programming I'm beginning to think that this old argument might actually have merrit... but I'm probably just getting old... I feel that it's actually the education system that is most responsible for my loss of childhood imagination, but I'm getting off-topic, sorry.
Anyway, about the calculator: It was introduced in my 7th-grade maths class and I had a nifty solar-powered model. I've never been good at arithmetic anyway, but I can still do basic addition, subtraction and multiplication in my head, so I don't need to carry one with me all the time to catch out someone short-changing me today. I do think that the calculator was actually a help in class: it freed me from the burden of my poor arithmetic enough to learn the finer points of the mathematics I was being taught.
I would never have understood standard deviation or simultaneos equasions if I had been too distracted about what sqrt(47 / 2.5) ^ 3 equals to...
As for cheating, well, you can confiscate equipment. Besides, you still need basic understanding of a sensible answer: If you enter 12 / 4 into a calculator and it anwsers 0.3 then you need to know that this is not in a sensible range (you must have bumped the 0 key and entered 12 / 40). If you can't figure that much out, then a calculator will be no help anyway.
I'm a strong believer in Steve Job's ideology of computers as "bicycles for the mind". The trick I see is finding when "too early" is, and this is where I agree with parent post. We need to teach our kids how to walk before they can run, but then they must be allowed to run. I think that the only way to really be sure when it's not still too early is to get involved with your kids, and judge for yourself. Have them involved in the decision too. If you delegate this responsibility to schools, it's too easy for the kid to be held back or advanced too soon because the school must necesarily choose the "right" time based on the median of their pupils maturity.
There is also the issue of safety on the Internet. Definately you should think of Internet as PG/M rated at least, and always supervise. But you don't have to get a laptop with an internet connection for it to still be useful for a young child. Just make sure you can supervise when they get on the Net. I probably will not let my kids on the net until they are much older than the earliest time I would get them a laptop -- these are very different tools, so my feeling is to treat them different and keep them separate.
Obviously, I didn't have a PC until much later in school, so it has not contributed to the poor spelling of this post!:-)
True. However, no matter how many times you explain that to your customers, they will want all three, and threaten to go somewhere else if you wont give it to them.
What eventually happens is that you (or someone other software house if you don't cave) will end up paying for item 2, or item 1 (in terms of contract penalties).
That's just the way it goes. If I could find out why it goes that way all the fscking time then I would start my own software house.
Remember that the shuttle doesn't go straight up, it curves out over the Atlantic. So the G forces don't act directly from fore to aft of the craft.
An upright climb would probably incurr too much negative G for the crew, risking red-out I think. Either that or it would probably place too much load on the EFT struts and tear the EFT and boosters away from the orbiter before the fuel is finished consumption.
Maybe... but my first impression was of Marvin from HHGTTG.
It's sorta cute animated, but not as cute as Thelma...
Re:Don't blame Internet for your attempt to Censor
on
Sixty Years of Memex
·
· Score: 1
lol!
now I do feel old, and I'm only 30!
sorry, generalising lands me in hot water again. It's only my opinion, of course. However, I do wonder if there is anything new today that would qualify to sit on the shelf of this specialty store... maybe that's the problem...
Don't blame Internet for your attempt to Censor
on
Sixty Years of Memex
·
· Score: 0, Troll
I decided that to grow the business I'd need to aim for a different demographic, the family market. My store specialised in family music - stuff that the whole family could listen to. I don't sell sick stuff like Marilyn Manson or cop-killer rap, and I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of.
...
People flocked to my store, knowing that they (and their children) could safely purchase records without profanity or violent lyrics.
...
Every day, fewer and fewer customers enter my store to buy fewer and fewer CDs. Why is no one buying CDs? Are people not interested in music? Do people prefer to watch TV, see films, read books? I don't know. But there is one, inescapable truth - Internet piracy is mostly to blame.
Rubbish.
What is to blame is that you won't sell what "today's young hoodlims" want to buy. In fact, most new CD's today are Crap, so it's a wonder you have anything left to stock your shelves after you filter it out.
I have not bought a new CD with a Produced date after about 1991, because it's all crap. I occasionally order older, hard-to-find CD's like Peter Schickele (P.D.Q Bach), or Andreas Volenveider - from the artists' own Internet sites - because speciallist stores like yours won't stock them, and main-stream stores only sell Britney Spears et cetera.
I would buy from a store like yours if it sold stuff for me to buy.
Perhaps instead of blaming the Internet for your woes, you should re-address your demographics, or cater for the long tail-end of the curve. Because the biggest issue affecting CD sales today is not the Internet, or Pirates (though they are a small factor in S.E Asia): it is really that today's mainstream artists are all mass-producing rubish that appeals to people who like to get their music pushed through their horrible tinny-sounding, mass-produced iPods.
Alternatively instead of blaming the Internet, you could harness it. Close your store-front and sell to your chosen demographic over the Internet. A web site is a lot cheaper to run, you know...
Don't make a Devil of the technology, find ways to make it work for you.
Don't know if anyone'll read this as it's old now... but thanks for the nitpick -- I wasn't even concious of short-strifting *nix/win!
It is true that MVS is not conjusive to play or experiment, though I do know of some old-timers who went to a lot of trouble to build themselves a sandbox. While it's no trouble to set up a JCL card and submit some job to JES (if you have some templates handy!), and there are some pretty powerful scripting/pattern crunching tools, like REXX, the pipe metaphore is missing so it's difficult to build "bottom-up" like a Lego set, as someone else pointed out.
So yes, there is another difference in Mainframe culture...
The sad fact is that, in today's environment, especially after the dot-com cowboys set Upper Management expectations, following Process is just too slow, or too expensive. Convincing management that a bigger cost up front will result in a lower cost in the long run is also futile when mgt sees it as "normal" for computer systems to break. After all, their Windows machine on their desk has been doing that for 20 years now, so it must be normal, right?
What matters most to managers or clients when deploying new systems these days seems to be "time to market", and the only consent to quality is that the IT dept/company follows check-list processes like CMMI or ISO9000 which do not address the real issues and put too much into the Process rather than the Result. Also, when the system breaks, it's typically at the expense of the IT company that built it, or was stupid enough to agree to use the off-the-shelf product in the first place, so there is nothing to drive a change of behaviour from the clients.
Mainframe is process-centred, *nix/windoze is not
on
What is Mainframe Culture?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Appart from the obvious religious stuff about GUI (or lack of) and user-centred interfaces (or lack of), the biggest difference, and the biggest advantage that Mainframe brings is it's culture of process and change control. It is something you should strive to let your Mainframe masters pass on to the *nix/windoze padawans before they die of old age.
I am a *nix padawan, but, crocky technology asside, I'm frequently impressed by my Mainframe elders, their ability to deploy code to Production environments that works *the first time* nearly every time, and their ability to communictate technical changes necessary to fix broken code in the middle of the night in the 0.1% of cases where they failed to get it working first time.
Key values that I have picked up from my masters, and which should be inherrited by both *nix and PC/Mac enclaves are focused around Engineering principles. Mainframe guru's program like a civil engineer builds a bridge. No shortcuts are taken unless it can be proven that it is safe to do so. Testing is carried out in stages and test results must be submitted with the change request before a program migrates to Production. If a program must "abend" (Abnormal End) then it should do so noisily and with as much information as possible. If it finishes cleanly, little information is needed other than this fact.
These closely follow the advice Raymond has encoded in his book, but there is probably much more that your Mainframe gurus know that you should cherrish and extend to your newer team members.
Forget about the religious wars, the technology changes and the "focus" of your programmers on users or other programmers. Get the real truth from your Mainframe masters who have seen it all pass before them but have learned the hard way how to make a stable computer environment that stays up, even on cruddy mainframe technology. If their attitudes were adopted by people fluent in today's fantastic systems, all people would benefit.
The reference to Joel's article is a little silly, because Joel has obviously just skimmed the Raymond book without thinking things through... particularly his strange assumption that making inter-program communiction textual for other programmers is somehow limiting to users, or that you require access to the source code to debug an API interraction. The point of the textual interraction is that, even without the source code (in a closed-source, Windows world) you can still debug an API if the data flow is human readable...
Um, I'm pretty sure that trademark law limits the trademark to a specific industry? Hence Apple (the record distributor) could not sue Apple Computer Inc because Apple C makes computers, not records, or music stuff (only now, with iPod, that's being revisited)...
Duh.
I'm glad I don't subscribe to NYTimes and therefore cannot verify the Fine Article...
Of course, this guy might own a heck of a lot of trademarks...
English spelling and grammar has never made any sense to me, and I have been a native Commonwealth English speaker for about 29 years, give or take the first couple of months of babbling.
However, despite this, I find English to be not too bad for communication, although if I want to think deep and clearly about difficult things, I might adopt Loglan instead, because English can be mirky at times and makes understanding the actual problem even trickier...
Here are my observations on English:
Most of the time, even if the riting haz por gramar and bad speling u can stil grok wot woz ment. Dis iz becoz inglish iz remarkabli staibl foneticly. So, what's your problem, exactly? This is the stance most Geeks take, I feel, and it comes from a very deep understanding of communication, not from sloppiness. In a way, it's a kind of play...
When the King James bible came out, "they" elected to "standardise" [note my correct Commonwealth spelling of that word, which is different from the correct American spelling...] all the different spellings of English words (notably, CHURCH, which was variously spelled CHIRCH, KIRK, CIRCH, CHURCH and some others, depending on where in Britain you lived). It explains why English is so inconsistent (a fact remarked by many): a comittee put it together from whatever the locals were doing in the 15th century...
If you read Victorian period books (or books by people close to that time, like original publications of any Tolkien LOTR, or perhaps some Sherlock Holmes) you'll see words like CONNEXION, which was a legitimate spelling that changed later...
In "America", a gentleman (can't remember his name, or when exactly but it was in the 19th century) had the, IMHO, very fine idea of developing "simplified spelling", so USA got words like COLOR insteard of COLOUR, JAIL instead of GAOL, etc. However, my personal taste for the INITIALIZE instead of INITIALISE differs from his, although I agree his makes much more sense...
So, "correct" English depends on:
Where in the world you are
When in the timestream you are
Optionally the target in the timespace continuum to which you are writing...
Finally, please observe that it is extremely bad netiquette to complain about English grammar/spelling because the Geek may not have English as a first (or even fluent) written language. Perhaps in Russia it is not considered rude to constantly nit-pick about it, but most of the Commonwealth thinks that it is , and the general netiquite adopted by netizens certainly does think it rude.
Thus, even though "should of" is a pet pieve of mine also, I won't pick someone up for it, assuming they are a non-native who has translitterated (sp?:-) what they have heard...
This is a flaw of trademark law, not of the open source development or distribution models...
I feel a huge rant comming on about trademarks and how stupid they are, especially when a company "goes global" and attempts to assert it's "rights" on new local companies in other contries... Witness Target when they came to Tasmania and had a fight over the pre-existing Targett shopping company there, or the fight over "Ugg Boots" in the Blue Mountains in New South Wales, Australia...
Then there was the stupid fight over "Tiger" that Apple (rightly) won -- but they didn't attack Sun over Java 1.5 Tiger...
Trademarks have no place in an international market. Period. The owners, and everyone (including me!) should just get off their band wagons.
No, I don't think this is an deliberate act to perpetrate FUD -- most likely the querant has succumed to FUD from others and is genuinely concerned. Our efforts would be better spent negating the FUD than launching accusations.
Don't be too quick to judge -- it's bad for your Karma (both/.'s and real Karma, if you believe in it).:-)
Slashdot Mirror
At least, that is how I feel whenever I have to stoop to using Solaris on my work's systems. They are devoutly Sun (or, at least irrationally fearful of Linux/AIX/HPUX/SCO or anything != Sun/IBM/Microsoft). The number of hours I've wasted writing some hack for ps when I could have just grabbed files out of /proc on Linux is depressing.
I'm sure my company likes to assure itself that it is a Sun partner and somehow this will get it all the support it needs... Not that it ever comes in time, helps much or solves any problems we have. Oh well.
Come to think of it, how much of their research dept is just researching current trends from competitors and racing to the USPTO to file a patent before the actual inventor can?
I choose not to like it...
Well, it's the same deal here, folks. If you want to use "Linux" (which is a Trademark of Linus Torvalds, for years now) to promote your business, you must register for permission. It is reasonable to pay a fee too, though that's not being asked for yet
What we probably want is a way to refer to "GNU/Linux" systems without using the Linux word. But then nobody would know what we're talking about. Well, that's business.
Nothing about Trademarks prevents you using the word "Linux" for non-promotional stuff (which is what most /.ers would be doing).
Bah, let them. I don't want to copy their shitty products anyway. If I have a family member who buys something from EMI Records, etc and it won't play in their equipment any more, I'll encourage them to return the defective product.
try visiting some net labels. You can find a lot of legal / legit sites listed at archive.org. Some I like are Kahvi Collective and Thinnerism although Thinner seems to prefer IE browsers and MP3 over Ogg, but you can work around it. The pieces are Creative Commons licenced, so it's free, but if you like these groups, consider donating them some money.
If you're not into techno, Thinner's sister label AutoPlate is good too.
Net labels are the way of the future. I've considered entering the music business, and from what I am seeing, media groups like RIAA / ARIA offer no market advantage over the Net now, and frankly I reckon I can make more money and get at least as wide a distribution without a corporate music label's help, thanks very much.
As for mainstreme penetration of music into the Net, RIAA and Apple are doing a grand job of advertising the fact that you can get music off the Net, thanks.
Now it is up to more musicians to shurk the big music companies that only serve to rip you off (witness complaints by Michael Jackson, Prince and others over their own deals). Get on the net, distribute your tracks yourself and be free -- you may even make a living in your own lifetime.
Actually, only in NSW are there permanent cameras with sign posts. So if you get caught in NSW, then yes, you're and idiot.
In Tasmania, the cameras are inside unmarked police cars, or camoflaged (sp?) in bushes on the road side and you can't see them. No signs to warn you.
You just don't speed, if you can help it. But then there are the set-ups (at bottom of a hill, or a crest, say) where it's natural to increase speed without noticing, unless you pay close attention to your dashboard instead of the road ahead....
Actually, it can be that hard. I have been booked because my speed crept over the limit on a downward grade, where a radar gun in an unmarked police car was waiting. This car was on the side of the road, not well off, and I was watching it, rather than watching the needle on my speedometer. What I was doing (speeding) was arguably safer than had I kept my eyes glued to my dash while this car potentially pulled out in front. I could have slowed, yes, but there was also a road train right up my arse.
Premier, After Effects: try Jahshaka (jahshaka.org), which looks suspiciously similar to the effects tools used by Peter Jackson's Weta Digital team. Also CinePaint (a high-bitdepth version of GIMP) is written by and widely used by the big movie studio pros, for whom Photoshop doesn't cut it. Not to mention linux farms (getting a little closer to the original topic) used by ILM for Star Wars II and III (and Weta use these too). Duh. For sound studio work, really serious stuff, who uses PCs anyway? Amiga maybe, or propper DSP equipment. I find JACK on Linux to be okay if you really heavily tweak it (or hack the kernel). But if you are using a general purpose PC, then you're screwed whatever OS you run -- they just don't cut it on the latency. Oh, unless you are a "live performance" DJ and have everything pre-mixed... And yes, you can even spend money and commercial product running on Linux if you want. I would prefer that to having to pay for every Windoze seat and hoping I don't get a BSOD, or having to wait for Windoze to stop swapping so I can have my frigging mouse back (a problem I currently have right now at work).
Well, yes I agree with this, and also no, I don't.
:-)
I recall my parents and teachers having similar arguments when my highshool considered introducing scientific calculators to the maths and science classes... At that time these devices cost about $120, which was a fair amount to spend on a 7th-grader in 1987 -- you could get 3 good maths text books for that money!
There were concerns that us pupils would lose the ability to do arithmetic in our heads and not be able to count change at shops, etc. Also there was concern of cheating on tests and exams.
The same argument of a loss of imagination and creativity could also be made about television, by the way. And with today's programming I'm beginning to think that this old argument might actually have merrit... but I'm probably just getting old... I feel that it's actually the education system that is most responsible for my loss of childhood imagination, but I'm getting off-topic, sorry.
Anyway, about the calculator: It was introduced in my 7th-grade maths class and I had a nifty solar-powered model. I've never been good at arithmetic anyway, but I can still do basic addition, subtraction and multiplication in my head, so I don't need to carry one with me all the time to catch out someone short-changing me today. I do think that the calculator was actually a help in class: it freed me from the burden of my poor arithmetic enough to learn the finer points of the mathematics I was being taught.
I would never have understood standard deviation or simultaneos equasions if I had been too distracted about what sqrt(47 / 2.5) ^ 3 equals to...
As for cheating, well, you can confiscate equipment. Besides, you still need basic understanding of a sensible answer: If you enter 12 / 4 into a calculator and it anwsers 0.3 then you need to know that this is not in a sensible range (you must have bumped the 0 key and entered 12 / 40). If you can't figure that much out, then a calculator will be no help anyway.
I'm a strong believer in Steve Job's ideology of computers as "bicycles for the mind". The trick I see is finding when "too early" is, and this is where I agree with parent post. We need to teach our kids how to walk before they can run, but then they must be allowed to run. I think that the only way to really be sure when it's not still too early is to get involved with your kids, and judge for yourself. Have them involved in the decision too. If you delegate this responsibility to schools, it's too easy for the kid to be held back or advanced too soon because the school must necesarily choose the "right" time based on the median of their pupils maturity.
There is also the issue of safety on the Internet. Definately you should think of Internet as PG/M rated at least, and always supervise. But you don't have to get a laptop with an internet connection for it to still be useful for a young child. Just make sure you can supervise when they get on the Net. I probably will not let my kids on the net until they are much older than the earliest time I would get them a laptop -- these are very different tools, so my feeling is to treat them different and keep them separate.
Obviously, I didn't have a PC until much later in school, so it has not contributed to the poor spelling of this post!
True. However, no matter how many times you explain that to your customers, they will want all three, and threaten to go somewhere else if you wont give it to them.
What eventually happens is that you (or someone other software house if you don't cave) will end up paying for item 2, or item 1 (in terms of contract penalties).
That's just the way it goes. If I could find out why it goes that way all the fscking time then I would start my own software house.
An upright climb would probably incurr too much negative G for the crew, risking red-out I think. Either that or it would probably place too much load on the EFT struts and tear the EFT and boosters away from the orbiter before the fuel is finished consumption.
But otherwise it's a great idea.
-- Marvin, HHGTTG.
It's sorta cute animated, but not as cute as Thelma...
now I do feel old, and I'm only 30!
sorry, generalising lands me in hot water again. It's only my opinion, of course. However, I do wonder if there is anything new today that would qualify to sit on the shelf of this specialty store... maybe that's the problem...
What is to blame is that you won't sell what "today's young hoodlims" want to buy. In fact, most new CD's today are Crap, so it's a wonder you have anything left to stock your shelves after you filter it out.
I have not bought a new CD with a Produced date after about 1991, because it's all crap. I occasionally order older, hard-to-find CD's like Peter Schickele (P.D.Q Bach), or Andreas Volenveider - from the artists' own Internet sites - because speciallist stores like yours won't stock them, and main-stream stores only sell Britney Spears et cetera.
I would buy from a store like yours if it sold stuff for me to buy.
Perhaps instead of blaming the Internet for your woes, you should re-address your demographics, or cater for the long tail-end of the curve. Because the biggest issue affecting CD sales today is not the Internet, or Pirates (though they are a small factor in S.E Asia): it is really that today's mainstream artists are all mass-producing rubish that appeals to people who like to get their music pushed through their horrible tinny-sounding, mass-produced iPods.
Alternatively instead of blaming the Internet, you could harness it. Close your store-front and sell to your chosen demographic over the Internet. A web site is a lot cheaper to run, you know...
Don't make a Devil of the technology, find ways to make it work for you.
It is true that MVS is not conjusive to play or experiment, though I do know of some old-timers who went to a lot of trouble to build themselves a sandbox. While it's no trouble to set up a JCL card and submit some job to JES (if you have some templates handy!), and there are some pretty powerful scripting/pattern crunching tools, like REXX, the pipe metaphore is missing so it's difficult to build "bottom-up" like a Lego set, as someone else pointed out.
So yes, there is another difference in Mainframe culture...
cheers.
What matters most to managers or clients when deploying new systems these days seems to be "time to market", and the only consent to quality is that the IT dept/company follows check-list processes like CMMI or ISO9000 which do not address the real issues and put too much into the Process rather than the Result. Also, when the system breaks, it's typically at the expense of the IT company that built it, or was stupid enough to agree to use the off-the-shelf product in the first place, so there is nothing to drive a change of behaviour from the clients.
I am a *nix padawan, but, crocky technology asside, I'm frequently impressed by my Mainframe elders, their ability to deploy code to Production environments that works *the first time* nearly every time, and their ability to communictate technical changes necessary to fix broken code in the middle of the night in the 0.1% of cases where they failed to get it working first time.
Key values that I have picked up from my masters, and which should be inherrited by both *nix and PC/Mac enclaves are focused around Engineering principles. Mainframe guru's program like a civil engineer builds a bridge. No shortcuts are taken unless it can be proven that it is safe to do so. Testing is carried out in stages and test results must be submitted with the change request before a program migrates to Production. If a program must "abend" (Abnormal End) then it should do so noisily and with as much information as possible. If it finishes cleanly, little information is needed other than this fact.
These closely follow the advice Raymond has encoded in his book, but there is probably much more that your Mainframe gurus know that you should cherrish and extend to your newer team members.
Forget about the religious wars, the technology changes and the "focus" of your programmers on users or other programmers. Get the real truth from your Mainframe masters who have seen it all pass before them but have learned the hard way how to make a stable computer environment that stays up, even on cruddy mainframe technology. If their attitudes were adopted by people fluent in today's fantastic systems, all people would benefit.
The reference to Joel's article is a little silly, because Joel has obviously just skimmed the Raymond book without thinking things through... particularly his strange assumption that making inter-program communiction textual for other programmers is somehow limiting to users, or that you require access to the source code to debug an API interraction. The point of the textual interraction is that, even without the source code (in a closed-source, Windows world) you can still debug an API if the data flow is human readable...
I'm surprised if it's my only spelling error... ;-)
Duh.
I'm glad I don't subscribe to NYTimes and therefore cannot verify the Fine Article...
Of course, this guy might own a heck of a lot of trademarks...
However, despite this, I find English to be not too bad for communication, although if I want to think deep and clearly about difficult things, I might adopt Loglan instead, because English can be mirky at times and makes understanding the actual problem even trickier...
Here are my observations on English:
So, "correct" English depends on:
Finally, please observe that it is extremely bad netiquette to complain about English grammar/spelling because the Geek may not have English as a first (or even fluent) written language. Perhaps in Russia it is not considered rude to constantly nit-pick about it, but most of the Commonwealth thinks that it is , and the general netiquite adopted by netizens certainly does think it rude.
Thus, even though "should of" is a pet pieve of mine also, I won't pick someone up for it, assuming they are a non-native who has translitterated (sp? :-) what they have heard...
So to sum up: get over it... :-)
what about FireSomeone... :-P
I feel a huge rant comming on about trademarks and how stupid they are, especially when a company "goes global" and attempts to assert it's "rights" on new local companies in other contries... Witness Target when they came to Tasmania and had a fight over the pre-existing Targett shopping company there, or the fight over "Ugg Boots" in the Blue Mountains in New South Wales, Australia...
Then there was the stupid fight over "Tiger" that Apple (rightly) won -- but they didn't attack Sun over Java 1.5 Tiger...
Trademarks have no place in an international market. Period. The owners, and everyone (including me!) should just get off their band wagons.
Don't be too quick to judge -- it's bad for your Karma (both /.'s and real Karma, if you believe in it). :-)