I do know exactly one company using OAS for in-house apps... but only one, and not for any good reason.
With any luck, this will eventually mean OAS will go away to be replaced by WebLogic. That would make sense, though... we'll see what Oracle actually does.
I'm still trying to make sense of using anything other than Tomcat, but some corps just like to spend money, I guess.
Plenty of *very* small business use ( or could afford ) an XServe. Now they're giving a business the chance, via VMware, to run, on one easy-to-admin XServe, any number of x86 Unix or Windows Server ( or non-server ) instances. Instead of buying some Dell server to run that one windows-only ( or Solaris-only )service or app, we can buy one XServe, virtualize the server OS we need, and run/maintain everything on that one XServe. Is that attractive to small businesses and small IT departments? Heck ya.
Of course, part of the collaboration will be to verify, as much as possible, that the actual hardware is genuine Apple stuff. Also of course, that restriction will be hacked around by a very small minority of folks who simply think it's fun to do so.
What I'd really like to see out of this is virtualization of *non-server* OS X instances being allowed. It's nice that I can have WindowsXP and Solarisx86 in VM on my MacBook, but if I could also run a copy of OS X that could be a 'test' environment for server apps, without having to worry about keeping my actual environment clean? That would be nice, too.
I have a G3 pre-USB Mac, too... what year was that thing built in?? It barely supports 10.2. But I can run 10.2 on it, and it's very usable.
I have a PentuimII machine as well, from about the same era... I'm not going to even try running XP on it, or even a PIII, though. It might install but it wouldn't be terribly usable. OS X 10.2 is quite usable on that G3 333Mhz machine, oddly enough... it'd be even better if I bothered to disable some of the graphics stuff ( drop shadows and such ), but I haven't found that I need to.
It's a pity that Apple didn't want to bother with continuing to support their pre-USB machines in OS X, but really, I have a hard time faulting them, even though I own one. Few people buying a commercial OS based computer today expect to be installing new versions of a different OS from the same manufacturer on that same machine over 10 years in the future. It's safe to say that if you've been running the same machine for that long, you're getting a long lifetime out of your hardware, much, much longer than average. A Mac Mini is cheap and 20 times faster than your old machine- go get one. If you're clinging to some "Classic" app, pick up a G4, they're not terribly expensive used... though they're holding value a lot better than my PII...
Restricting the number of characters per line in a programming language like Java, C, C++, C# or Objective-C makes no sense. Programmers should be encouraged to use reasonably verbose variable and method/function names, and not worry overmuch about line length or even indenting. You don't like the format a programmer used? It's a programming language- write yourself a formatter for it.
My editor word-wraps, and auto-formats, and it's just emacs, nothing special. Looking at code on paper is not the norm. You can reformat my code any way you like, but I'm going to look at it, and edit it, using whatever the size of my editor window happens to wrap at, and I'm not about to hit return just because it's close to the edge.
As a practical matter, *most* lines are going to be shorter than 120 chars or so, but... 80 ? For what logical purpose would you restrict it at all?
1970 called, it wants you to know you can update your coding conventions.
Of interest, I have worked for 4 different companies in my programming career. All worked on Windows systems, because - well, until very recently, a Linux desktop was a pain in the butt, and Macs cost too much compared with a stripped down Dell. But every single company used Cygwin as part of the standard developper environment.
Congratulations on never having had to work in a _real_ Windows shop. I'd never touch a Windows machine without immediately installing CygWin myself, but 'real' windows developers buy into the Microsoft Way and use Visual Studio or some other MS tool and look at you funny if you talk about anything else.
The only reason I'd ever choose native Subversion over a newer system like git or Mercurial is if I needed some tool that had builtin Subversion integration and didn't support anything else. Absent that criterion, IMO if you choose Subversion it's a sign you don't really understand version control too well.
What if you have a bunch of developers working with some ( unfortunately, let me say that ) Windows-only tools for historical reasons ? Are you really saying that I should have a team of VisualStudio users install cygwin on their systems ?
git is great for Linux kernel developers, but 'install this massive compatibility layer to use this product' will fail to make you a lot of friends, especially in a Windows-friendly corporate environment. I say that as an avid, daily CygWin user and longtime Windows hater. We could have maybe picked Mercurial, but a year ago when we looked, it didn't even hit our radar as a possibility.
Subversion has some little issues, but it's getting lots of attention, and the problems aren't bad. I'm a little suspicious that the performance claims of Mercurial might not be measuring apples-to-apples... an 'svn commit' is both an 'hg commit' and 'hg push', if you want to be fair.
At least in a general case, I couldn't expect the developers I work with to gzip their binaries before checking them into version control.
Doing so means you have to unzip them to use them. Not very handy. Most users want to use Subversion the way they should be able to use version control- a checkout should give you all of the files you need to work with on a given project, with minimal need to move/install pieces after checkout. Implementing the 'best' suggested workaround would mean needing a script or other way to get the binaries unpacked. Programmers are often annoyed enough by the extra step of *using* version control, now you have to zip any binaries you commit to the repository?
I'm unimpressed by their performance testing methodology... they give shared server and desktop performance numbers, but have no idea what 'else' those machines were doing? Pointless. I'd like more details regarding what they're doing in their testing. Their tests were done with a "directory tree of binary files", but don't say what size or how many files?
My tests on our server show a 28MB binary checkout ( LAN, SPARC server, Pentium M client ) takes ~20 seconds. Export takes ~2sec. That must be a big set of files to cause a 9 minute *export*... several gigs, am I wrong? It'd be nice for them to say. Most of us, even in a worst case, won't have more than a few hundred MB in a single project.
The only *real* solution will be a Subversion configuration option which lets you say "please, use all my disk space, speed is all I care about when it comes to binary files". CollabNet is focused enough on getting big-business support contracts that it shouldn't be long before we see this issue addressed in one manner or another. You -know- they're reading this article!
I was trying, but as a hobby programmer I used it exactly as you described. I use it to store my scripts, source code and documentation.
Exactly... all you need for hobby projects. You don't have to worry about someone else needing your binaries. You don't have lots of images or proprietary-format documents ( some of which can get really large... think of a database as a document... ), and you don't even have to worry about someone being able to build your project w/o this dynamic library or that compiler or this other tool.
We have to worry about all of that stuff, and want every aspect of it to be in version control so we have a record of who changed what, and when... I'm sure you get it now. Think enterprise. Recent press releases from CollabNet typically include lines like "More than 300 industry leading companies use CollabNet's solutions today, including Reuters, Philips Medical System, Federal Express, Cap Gemini and Barclays Global Investors among others."... you can bet some of those folks have a binary file or two which need to be tracked in version control.
1) you want deployment without the need to build 2) you have proprietary build tools limited to developer use, or release engineers unable to build for whatever reason ( similar to #1, I know... ) 3) images, of course. 4) Word, Excel, other proprietary document formats are all binary. 5) third-party binary installation packages, patches, dynamic libs, tools, etc.
You're just not trying, or you're thinking of version control as something that only programmers would use, and that they'd only use it to store their text source. There are as many reasons to store binary files in version control as there are reasons to have binary files...
Ok... I have a feeling I might be replying to a troll, but here goes for the obvious...
Excluding iMacs and laptops, all of Apples' other models ( minis and Pros ) are headless.
Price points for these are $599 (1.6Ghz Core Duo Combo Drive), $799 (1.8Ghz Core Duo SuperDrive), and... yea, OK, there seems to be a gap here ( what's wrong w/ the iMac screen, again? )... the 2.0GHz Mac Pro at $2,200.
I guess they figure you would want to use the iMac screen? How would a model without a screen boost sales in the midrange? What do you need that a Mac Mini is somehow unfit for, but wouldn't benefit from dual 2.0Ghz Xeons?
I suspect Apple may have actually done their homework on this one. Almost anyone who doesn't want to or can't spend $2k on a Mac Pro ( and doesn't like all-in-ones ) will just buy a $799 Mini. Unless you just want to run Linux or Windows anyway and somehow -must- have $1000 tower, in which case Apple doesn't need you that bad, I guess you're right just a little. They'll make money without your help.
Sorry, but to your other point... NeXTStep was 'out there' for ( fairly ) generic hardware, how well did it sell ?
I just had to ask. OS X would fare a little better than NeXTStep did ( just because it's half the price and has better app support ), but it wouldn't do a lot better, and dealing with 'generic' hardware issues and drivers is not something Apple wants to do... and Apple would have to increase the price of the software. Steve Jobs has played this game before. It's not likely that there will be clones, and if there are, it'll be a fairly controlled deal. Get over it.
Hackers do and will hack OS X to run it on unsupported hardware. The key there is that Apple doesn't incur support costs...
The only comment in the teaser rant that seems out of place is the one about humans, really. All the comics, SonicX tv show, etc have Sonic and pals hanging out with humans... so it should be OK if he hangs out with humans in the new games. The only problem is that with the possible exception of Sonic Rush, the games aren't well-done or fun to play.
Actually, they said "chips" not "chip", probably meaning the Centrino platform is made up of a number of ( specified ) chips, and now an 802.11n package is included in the mix. Right now you're still Centrio if you include one of three approved Intel wireless packages... this probably just means they've announced a fourth option. The real question is will OEMs put it in their laptops, will anyone tell buyers that the standard is not approved yet, and how well will it sell... judging by sales of existing "pre-N" stuff, I'm going to guess it's a real standards nightmare already.
First, you should write a test plan. Actually, scratch that... first, you should write a design document. You have one of those, right? If not, you don't know what you're testing, and will eventually fail to cover some portion of your product, and that portion will likely break. Once you have a halfway decent design document, write a test plan that refers to your design document.
I'm going to second the notion I've seen in other posts that if your project really is big, there should be a programmer or analyst dedicated to testing it. You can hire someone who is less of a programmer and more of a tester if you want, but you'll get the best coverage if you can find someone with real programming chops who is able to design and implement tests. If you're doing your project right, that QA team will be every bit as involved in every portion of your project as you are.
Without knowing more about your particular project, it's very difficult to suggest appropriate tools. Different types of systems require different approaches to testing.
I don't even play the game, but that was a god damn great episode. The referenced Wikipedia page claims Blizzard helped with the machinima ( and apparently, the delay ) in the episode.
but seriously, the point where you know you have a problem is the point at which you're picking your hobby/addiction/whatever over your S.O... time to kick either the hobby, or if they're really that unsatisfying, the S.O...
This article references Stanford, where Computer Science is taught under the department of engineering. It's not a liberal arts degree or a math degree, like it is at some schools, it is, properly, an engineering/science degree. The downside is that they make you take a lot of EE, Physics, and hard math classes. In any event, they're thinking of it as an engineering degree.
That said, it's a tough call. I don't know if I would have completed my Computer Science degree program if I was to go school now. But would I be tempted by a Literature degree or a Philosophy degree instead? A Music degree? Would studying digital circuits and getting an EE degree assure a good job at a decent wage? I might be tempted to stay in school, get an MBA, and thus become *completely* useless... but possibly in line for an IT Directorship, and a hell of a lot more cash than I make with a BSCS. On the other hand, maybe I'd become a plumber, they appear to be able to charge a pretty good hourly rate...
Did you notice that part there where he says "SF bay area" ?
$55k might be OK if you're single and OK sharing a rental, but you're not buying SF bay area real estate with anything less than twice that. If you're supporting a family on less than $70k in the SF Bay Area, I feel really sorry for you.
$55k in Iowa, Texas, Chicago, or even Virginia, that's one thing... in the SF bay area, he has right to complain.
An average two-bedroom apartment in Pacific Heights is $2,800 a month. That's $33,600 a year. Most folks will pay close to that or, if they're buying, more, just for housing. Does that $55k salary still look so great in that context?
To any but a knee-jerk anti-Busher, this account has the air of authenticity. Like so many things, we'll probably never know for certain all of the details, but this is what I believe happened.
I don't know about knee-jerk anti-Bushers... I've been looking really, really hard for hints that Iraq had WMDs. It looks like they did have them, before the first gulf war. After that, it looks like, and the current administration has told us that they now know, that Saddam was so afraid of the inevitable ( his overthrow by western-backed forces ) that he'd gone out of his way to destroy anything like a real weapons program. If you're denying that at this point, you pretty much might want to consider that you're possibly looking to justify your past actions by looking for something that isn't there.
The air of authenticity does not make actual reality. Of course, you're free to believe what you want... but just because you believe everything was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't make it so.
I'd like dearly to be able to tell my non-US friends that we're in Iraq because we had some sort of evidence that Saddam had WMDs, but there's just nothing to point to, and worse, almost everything that was pointed to in the past has been shown to be misinformation. It's made the U.S. look very, very bad, I'm afraid, and people who have come out against Bush and Rumsfield and the lot on the Iraq war aren't neccessarily just "knee-jerk anti-Bushers" anymore... they're generals, right-wingers, and genuinely concerned citizens who think they may have been misled, intentionally or otherwise.
This totally inevitable thing just happened, something that should have happened a long time ago, but I never fully thought it would actually come to pass... and although it's 100% completely a good thing, I'm oddly sentimental and slightly sad about it, just because it's an end of an era, a shift in the way things always have been. Then, there is that same twinge of excitement and hope for the future.
I don't watch much, because about 98% of the content on cable inspires me to become independently wealthy just so I can travel the world and strangle all the reality-show attention whores in a vain attempt to cleanse the airwaves once again.
That would be a great show! Be sure to film it all, I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like to watch that!
Maybe you don't need to become wealthy first... just sell that idea to some reality TV show producer...
What next, making Ron Jeremy the pornography czar?
That would actually make a lot more sense than running mission-critical security-sensitive apps on an unpatched Windows installation. If you like porn, that is.
Heck, it would make more sense even if you *didn't* like porn, now that I think about it...
But hey, remember, this is from the administration that brought you Iraq's WMDs and the post-Katrina disaster recovery response. Poor decisions ? Bungling?
It's strange to see Mac users asking about "amazing Windows software"
I'm aware that sarcasm is difficult to convey via text, but in this context, is it really that difficult to detect ?
I think I'm supposed to type "HAND YHBT", or something lame like that now...
On the other hand, your reading of the situation is absolutely correct. Boot Camp is for people who already have a copy of Windows, and are otherwise invested in some sort of Windows-only software not for current Mac users... unless you mean it's for Mac users justifying a new Mac Intel purchase because they can now (a) get rid of an existing Windows PC, (b) do something they couldn't before, not that they need to, but it might be useful... or (c) run that crappy in-house VB app, or Outlook, or whatever it is that might have stopped them from using their Mac for work before.
In that regard, it's pretty neat. Oh, and for web developers, guess what? You can test for every OS/browser combination you'd want ( except stuff you *really* don't care about, like, say, Solaris or Amiga ), all on one box. You're a developer or IT guy who has to use 3DMax or deal with an occasional VBscript or.NET component, but you like *nixy goodness and dead-simple OS X-yness? I'm trying not to want one, but I'm irresistably drawn to the MacBook Pro and the Intel Mini... I'm trying hard to hold out for a non-pro MacBook and an Intel PowerMac, but I don't know if I'll be able to wait very long... if I had just a little more money, that'd be it, it'd be all over, I'd own a set already... and no, I don't really *need* to run Windows... but I *could* get rid of my old PC, and I like the idea of that...
I have to agree. You see, I've been doing a job search lately, and I've found that the only jobs where people talk up-front about telecommuting are contract gigs... and ones that don't pay, to boot.
Excluding, of course, those IBM jobs which are really "Mobile", i.e. you travel, visiting customer sites and such.
My evidence is only anecdotal, but telecommuting was much more of an option 8-10 years ago than it is now. There are some telecommute gigs, but they are neither 'widespread' as in there are many of them, nor is the practice 'widespread' as in, there aren't really that many companies willing to allow their full-time, non-contract employees to telecommute. Does this survey not take into account job security? Sure, I can almost always find another job... but I'd like to not look for work every few years, thanks!
Unfortunately, I moved out of the city a while ago, but fortunately, I'm finding myself willing to sit in traffic to get to a job. I may have to buy a hybrid, though- a car that shuts down the engine while sitting in traffic might be a good thing to have.
Slashdot Mirror
I do know exactly one company using OAS for in-house apps... but only one, and not for any good reason.
With any luck, this will eventually mean OAS will go away to be replaced by WebLogic. That would make sense, though... we'll see what Oracle actually does.
I'm still trying to make sense of using anything other than Tomcat, but some corps just like to spend money, I guess.
Plenty of *very* small business use ( or could afford ) an XServe. Now they're giving a business the chance, via VMware, to run, on one easy-to-admin XServe, any number of x86 Unix or Windows Server ( or non-server ) instances. Instead of buying some Dell server to run that one windows-only ( or Solaris-only )service or app, we can buy one XServe, virtualize the server OS we need, and run/maintain everything on that one XServe. Is that attractive to small businesses and small IT departments? Heck ya.
Of course, part of the collaboration will be to verify, as much as possible, that the actual hardware is genuine Apple stuff. Also of course, that restriction will be hacked around by a very small minority of folks who simply think it's fun to do so.
What I'd really like to see out of this is virtualization of *non-server* OS X instances being allowed. It's nice that I can have WindowsXP and Solarisx86 in VM on my MacBook, but if I could also run a copy of OS X that could be a 'test' environment for server apps, without having to worry about keeping my actual environment clean? That would be nice, too.
I have a G3 pre-USB Mac, too... what year was that thing built in?? It barely supports 10.2. But I can run 10.2 on it, and it's very usable.
I have a PentuimII machine as well, from about the same era... I'm not going to even try running XP on it, or even a PIII, though. It might install but it wouldn't be terribly usable. OS X 10.2 is quite usable on that G3 333Mhz machine, oddly enough... it'd be even better if I bothered to disable some of the graphics stuff ( drop shadows and such ), but I haven't found that I need to.
It's a pity that Apple didn't want to bother with continuing to support their pre-USB machines in OS X, but really, I have a hard time faulting them, even though I own one. Few people buying a commercial OS based computer today expect to be installing new versions of a different OS from the same manufacturer on that same machine over 10 years in the future. It's safe to say that if you've been running the same machine for that long, you're getting a long lifetime out of your hardware, much, much longer than average. A Mac Mini is cheap and 20 times faster than your old machine- go get one. If you're clinging to some "Classic" app, pick up a G4, they're not terribly expensive used... though they're holding value a lot better than my PII...
Restricting the number of characters per line in a programming language like Java, C, C++, C# or Objective-C makes no sense. Programmers should be encouraged to use reasonably verbose variable and method/function names, and not worry overmuch about line length or even indenting. You don't like the format a programmer used? It's a programming language- write yourself a formatter for it.
My editor word-wraps, and auto-formats, and it's just emacs, nothing special. Looking at code on paper is not the norm. You can reformat my code any way you like, but I'm going to look at it, and edit it, using whatever the size of my editor window happens to wrap at, and I'm not about to hit return just because it's close to the edge.
As a practical matter, *most* lines are going to be shorter than 120 chars or so, but... 80 ? For what logical purpose would you restrict it at all?
1970 called, it wants you to know you can update your coding conventions.
Great, that'll be really useful as soon as the iPhone ships with a Terminal app...
Congratulations on never having had to work in a _real_ Windows shop. I'd never touch a Windows machine without immediately installing CygWin myself, but 'real' windows developers buy into the Microsoft Way and use Visual Studio or some other MS tool and look at you funny if you talk about anything else.
What if you have a bunch of developers working with some ( unfortunately, let me say that ) Windows-only tools for historical reasons ? Are you really saying that I should have a team of VisualStudio users install cygwin on their systems ?
git is great for Linux kernel developers, but 'install this massive compatibility layer to use this product' will fail to make you a lot of friends, especially in a Windows-friendly corporate environment. I say that as an avid, daily CygWin user and longtime Windows hater. We could have maybe picked Mercurial, but a year ago when we looked, it didn't even hit our radar as a possibility.
Subversion has some little issues, but it's getting lots of attention, and the problems aren't bad. I'm a little suspicious that the performance claims of Mercurial might not be measuring apples-to-apples... an 'svn commit' is both an 'hg commit' and 'hg push', if you want to be fair.
Doing so means you have to unzip them to use them. Not very handy. Most users want to use Subversion the way they should be able to use version control- a checkout should give you all of the files you need to work with on a given project, with minimal need to move/install pieces after checkout. Implementing the 'best' suggested workaround would mean needing a script or other way to get the binaries unpacked. Programmers are often annoyed enough by the extra step of *using* version control, now you have to zip any binaries you commit to the repository?
I'm unimpressed by their performance testing methodology... they give shared server and desktop performance numbers, but have no idea what 'else' those machines were doing? Pointless. I'd like more details regarding what they're doing in their testing. Their tests were done with a "directory tree of binary files", but don't say what size or how many files?
My tests on our server show a 28MB binary checkout ( LAN, SPARC server, Pentium M client ) takes ~20 seconds. Export takes ~2sec. That must be a big set of files to cause a 9 minute *export*... several gigs, am I wrong? It'd be nice for them to say. Most of us, even in a worst case, won't have more than a few hundred MB in a single project.
The only *real* solution will be a Subversion configuration option which lets you say "please, use all my disk space, speed is all I care about when it comes to binary files". CollabNet is focused enough on getting big-business support contracts that it shouldn't be long before we see this issue addressed in one manner or another. You -know- they're reading this article!
Exactly... all you need for hobby projects. You don't have to worry about someone else needing your binaries. You don't have lots of images or proprietary-format documents ( some of which can get really large... think of a database as a document... ), and you don't even have to worry about someone being able to build your project w/o this dynamic library or that compiler or this other tool.
We have to worry about all of that stuff, and want every aspect of it to be in version control so we have a record of who changed what, and when... I'm sure you get it now. Think enterprise. Recent press releases from CollabNet typically include lines like "More than 300 industry leading companies use CollabNet's solutions today, including Reuters, Philips Medical System, Federal Express, Cap Gemini and Barclays Global Investors among others."... you can bet some of those folks have a binary file or two which need to be tracked in version control.
1) you want deployment without the need to build
2) you have proprietary build tools limited to developer use, or release engineers unable to build for whatever reason ( similar to #1, I know... )
3) images, of course.
4) Word, Excel, other proprietary document formats are all binary.
5) third-party binary installation packages, patches, dynamic libs, tools, etc.
You're just not trying, or you're thinking of version control as something that only programmers would use, and that they'd only use it to store their text source. There are as many reasons to store binary files in version control as there are reasons to have binary files...
Ok... I have a feeling I might be replying to a troll, but here goes for the obvious...
... yea, OK, there seems to be a gap here ( what's wrong w/ the iMac screen, again? )... the 2.0GHz Mac Pro at $2,200.
Excluding iMacs and laptops, all of Apples' other models ( minis and Pros ) are headless.
Price points for these are $599 (1.6Ghz Core Duo Combo Drive), $799 (1.8Ghz Core Duo SuperDrive), and
I guess they figure you would want to use the iMac screen? How would a model without a screen boost sales in the midrange? What do you need that a Mac Mini is somehow unfit for, but wouldn't benefit from dual 2.0Ghz Xeons?
I suspect Apple may have actually done their homework on this one. Almost anyone who doesn't want to or can't spend $2k on a Mac Pro ( and doesn't like all-in-ones ) will just buy a $799 Mini. Unless you just want to run Linux or Windows anyway and somehow -must- have $1000 tower, in which case Apple doesn't need you that bad, I guess you're right just a little. They'll make money without your help.
Sorry, but to your other point... NeXTStep was 'out there' for ( fairly ) generic hardware, how well did it sell ?
I just had to ask. OS X would fare a little better than NeXTStep did ( just because it's half the price and has better app support ), but it wouldn't do a lot better, and dealing with 'generic' hardware issues and drivers is not something Apple wants to do... and Apple would have to increase the price of the software. Steve Jobs has played this game before. It's not likely that there will be clones, and if there are, it'll be a fairly controlled deal. Get over it.
Hackers do and will hack OS X to run it on unsupported hardware. The key there is that Apple doesn't incur support costs...
The only comment in the teaser rant that seems out of place is the one about humans, really. All the comics, SonicX tv show, etc have Sonic and pals hanging out with humans... so it should be OK if he hangs out with humans in the new games. The only problem is that with the possible exception of Sonic Rush, the games aren't well-done or fun to play.
Actually, they said "chips" not "chip", probably meaning the Centrino platform is made up of a number of ( specified ) chips, and now an 802.11n package is included in the mix. Right now you're still Centrio if you include one of three approved Intel wireless packages... this probably just means they've announced a fourth option. The real question is will OEMs put it in their laptops, will anyone tell buyers that the standard is not approved yet, and how well will it sell... judging by sales of existing "pre-N" stuff, I'm going to guess it's a real standards nightmare already.
First, you should write a test plan. Actually, scratch that... first, you should write a design document. You have one of those, right? If not, you don't know what you're testing, and will eventually fail to cover some portion of your product, and that portion will likely break. Once you have a halfway decent design document, write a test plan that refers to your design document.
I'm going to second the notion I've seen in other posts that if your project really is big, there should be a programmer or analyst dedicated to testing it. You can hire someone who is less of a programmer and more of a tester if you want, but you'll get the best coverage if you can find someone with real programming chops who is able to design and implement tests. If you're doing your project right, that QA team will be every bit as involved in every portion of your project as you are.
Without knowing more about your particular project, it's very difficult to suggest appropriate tools. Different types of systems require different approaches to testing.
I don't even play the game, but that was a god damn great episode. The referenced Wikipedia page claims Blizzard helped with the machinima ( and apparently, the delay ) in the episode.
but seriously, the point where you know you have a problem is the point at which you're picking your hobby/addiction/whatever over your S.O... time to kick either the hobby, or if they're really that unsatisfying, the S.O...
This article references Stanford, where Computer Science is taught under the department of engineering. It's not a liberal arts degree or a math degree, like it is at some schools, it is, properly, an engineering/science degree. The downside is that they make you take a lot of EE, Physics, and hard math classes. In any event, they're thinking of it as an engineering degree.
That said, it's a tough call. I don't know if I would have completed my Computer Science degree program if I was to go school now. But would I be tempted by a Literature degree or a Philosophy degree instead? A Music degree? Would studying digital circuits and getting an EE degree assure a good job at a decent wage? I might be tempted to stay in school, get an MBA, and thus become *completely* useless... but possibly in line for an IT Directorship, and a hell of a lot more cash than I make with a BSCS. On the other hand, maybe I'd become a plumber, they appear to be able to charge a pretty good hourly rate...
Did you notice that part there where he says "SF bay area" ?
$55k might be OK if you're single and OK sharing a rental, but you're not buying SF bay area real estate with anything less than twice that. If you're supporting a family on less than $70k in the SF Bay Area, I feel really sorry for you.
$55k in Iowa, Texas, Chicago, or even Virginia, that's one thing... in the SF bay area, he has right to complain.
An average two-bedroom apartment in Pacific Heights is $2,800 a month. That's $33,600 a year. Most folks will pay close to that or, if they're buying, more, just for housing. Does that $55k salary still look so great in that context?
I don't know about knee-jerk anti-Bushers... I've been looking really, really hard for hints that Iraq had WMDs. It looks like they did have them, before the first gulf war. After that, it looks like, and the current administration has told us that they now know, that Saddam was so afraid of the inevitable ( his overthrow by western-backed forces ) that he'd gone out of his way to destroy anything like a real weapons program. If you're denying that at this point, you pretty much might want to consider that you're possibly looking to justify your past actions by looking for something that isn't there.
The air of authenticity does not make actual reality. Of course, you're free to believe what you want... but just because you believe everything was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't make it so.
I'd like dearly to be able to tell my non-US friends that we're in Iraq because we had some sort of evidence that Saddam had WMDs, but there's just nothing to point to, and worse, almost everything that was pointed to in the past has been shown to be misinformation. It's made the U.S. look very, very bad, I'm afraid, and people who have come out against Bush and Rumsfield and the lot on the Iraq war aren't neccessarily just "knee-jerk anti-Bushers" anymore... they're generals, right-wingers, and genuinely concerned citizens who think they may have been misled, intentionally or otherwise.
It had to be said. Now I'm off to buy myself a new 17" MacBook Pro.
You must be new here...
This totally inevitable thing just happened, something that should have happened a long time ago, but I never fully thought it would actually come to pass... and although it's 100% completely a good thing, I'm oddly sentimental and slightly sad about it, just because it's an end of an era, a shift in the way things always have been. Then, there is that same twinge of excitement and hope for the future.
Weird.
That would be a great show! Be sure to film it all, I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like to watch that!
Maybe you don't need to become wealthy first... just sell that idea to some reality TV show producer...
That would actually make a lot more sense than running mission-critical security-sensitive apps on an unpatched Windows installation. If you like porn, that is.
Heck, it would make more sense even if you *didn't* like porn, now that I think about it...
But hey, remember, this is from the administration that brought you Iraq's WMDs and the post-Katrina disaster recovery response. Poor decisions ? Bungling?
I'm shocked, I tell you, SHOCKED!!
I'm aware that sarcasm is difficult to convey via text, but in this context, is it really that difficult to detect ?
I think I'm supposed to type "HAND YHBT", or something lame like that now...
On the other hand, your reading of the situation is absolutely correct. Boot Camp is for people who already have a copy of Windows, and are otherwise invested in some sort of Windows-only software not for current Mac users... unless you mean it's for Mac users justifying a new Mac Intel purchase because they can now (a) get rid of an existing Windows PC, (b) do something they couldn't before, not that they need to, but it might be useful... or (c) run that crappy in-house VB app, or Outlook, or whatever it is that might have stopped them from using their Mac for work before.
In that regard, it's pretty neat. Oh, and for web developers, guess what? You can test for every OS/browser combination you'd want ( except stuff you *really* don't care about, like, say, Solaris or Amiga ), all on one box. You're a developer or IT guy who has to use 3DMax or deal with an occasional VBscript or .NET component, but you like *nixy goodness and dead-simple OS X-yness? I'm trying not to want one, but I'm irresistably drawn to the MacBook Pro and the Intel Mini... I'm trying hard to hold out for a non-pro MacBook and an Intel PowerMac, but I don't know if I'll be able to wait very long... if I had just a little more money, that'd be it, it'd be all over, I'd own a set already... and no, I don't really *need* to run Windows... but I *could* get rid of my old PC, and I like the idea of that...
Excluding, of course, those IBM jobs which are really "Mobile", i.e. you travel, visiting customer sites and such.
My evidence is only anecdotal, but telecommuting was much more of an option 8-10 years ago than it is now. There are some telecommute gigs, but they are neither 'widespread' as in there are many of them, nor is the practice 'widespread' as in, there aren't really that many companies willing to allow their full-time, non-contract employees to telecommute. Does this survey not take into account job security? Sure, I can almost always find another job... but I'd like to not look for work every few years, thanks!
Unfortunately, I moved out of the city a while ago, but fortunately, I'm finding myself willing to sit in traffic to get to a job. I may have to buy a hybrid, though- a car that shuts down the engine while sitting in traffic might be a good thing to have.