Visual Basic where there's 40 different table widgets, that is a bad thing
I beg do differ. I have choice, and choice is always a good thing. I can choose the widget that works for me, or write my own and pass it on to those who may have needs similar to mine. That's the beauty of open source. In your world, I guess there would be one standards body controlling the table widget and we'd all have to like it, and if not we get stuffed. You sound like a Windows sales person dude. Open source is all about choice.
even better? I mean, You can run Apache, MySQL, PHP on windows.
And hey, you can run PHP over IIS
And hey, Sybase runs on Windows and Linux.
So under O'Reily's premise, Lamp can mean whatever the hell you want? Isn't that a pretty retarded acronym then?
LAMP=Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP. Nothing more. Not a big deal, but still, at least it has a definition. Per O'reilly it can mean whatever you want it to mean. That's just stupid.
AFAIK, O'Reilly didn't coin the term LAMP. They're just bastardizing it.
So to understand you correctly, you use perl over chillisoft ASP to run your code on a non-iis box? Are you related to MacGuyver? I mean, really dude.... mod_perl on Apache is a lot less layers to have to depend on. Less stuff that can go wrong really.
Personally, I have a hard time storing my email in a country where the building can be blown up any time. by a suicide bomber Come to think of it, USA probably isn't a good place either...
Here in BC, Canada, we had someone with a generator running off a waterwheel in the stream in his back yard. He was told that due to provincial regulations he wasn't allowed to produce hiw own electricity through Hydroelectric means. See, it's not just Americans that have anal regulatory bodies:)
And as said, cost can never be an issue since it's pretty well proven that a bit of good, honest and sustained user testing and communicating saves heaps and heaps of development costs later on.
Unfortunately, your ideas work with companies that are in the black. Hell, I'm the biggest fan of building software that has long term viability. However any company bleeding red needs to look towards profitability first, and then software sustainability second. Companies I've worked for were bleeding red ink bad. An approach that focuses on the long term means nothing to a company who's looking at short term survival.
I saw a company that followed the life cycle to the letter. They focused so much on the long term that the short term became a blur. They bled red ink so bad that they lost sight of what was most important - profitability. A business who doesn't turn a profit is one that has no sustainability. Until then, you focus on what the business needs today, not what they might need tomorrow.
Look, there's a lot of ad-hominims in your post, but I'm going to respond anyway. You don't know me, my curcumstances, or anything about businesses in general really.
I come from a world where small businesses have scarce resources. That means a finite amount of funds and man-hours to accomplish an infinite amount of tasks. You are faced with a choice in the development of this system: shave 10 seconds off the processing time of a purchase order, or reduce the double-entry of invoices in another module. Build invoice in one system, re-enter in another. The latter has a greater cost than the former, requiring the services of two full-time employees. The former means that the purchaser (who isn't at 1005 utilization) has to spend a bit more time doing his job. If you have to make a choice to divert resources, you don't look at the most unhappy employee, you look at the most cost effective. Worse case scenario, you hire a new purchaser who's more than happy to take on the work.
Very well put. This MS-Access based app was facing a lot of problems. It was slow, making inefficient connections to the database, etc etc... We were faced with a choice to make -> n-tier app in VB, or web based. With a large company, a web based solution seemed more appropriate. And it was. Keeping mind that RAD was very often necessary. The app worked faster and more efficiently. If our upgrade was a problem, the new employees would have bitched as well. Thing is they didn't. They worked with the system and liked it. The users before had an aversion to change. The new users didn't experience change. My point was simply they didn't like the change.
Actually, there's one written in Javascript, but why bother? That pins you down in your code, and encourages that kind of behaviour from end users. We managed to find viable alternatives, but it was with the new purchasers after the bitchy ones quit. That wasn't my point though. It was just an example.
One thing I noticed about users is they are averse to change. Here's a typical user:
You add 300 new features to their OS, KDE rocks. But they can't find their "A" drive. "I have to go to/mnt/fd0 instead?" Because of this, they will hate it. Here's the proof.
We took a company with a shit MS-access app thingy and converted it to a web based app. It ran faster, more stable, suppored more users, etc... Lots of plusses. But the select box in MS-Access lets you type in it to lookup values, rather than just the first letter like in a browser. We added hundreds of new features, but because they lost one the upgrade was crap and they couldn't use it. I'm afraid that it's all about who bitches the loudest
I dunno.... Some of the Firefox add-ons are a web developer's dream. Stuff like live http headers and the developer toolbar make life heaven...
There are good browser add-ons, you just need to look at GOOD browsers:)
I think Mandrake is the best jumping in point for users who have never touched Linux before.
Hmmm... Tried Mandrake 5 and 6.2 when I first jumped on the Linux bandwagon... I must say back then it definately wasn't for the faint of heart, and turned me off of Linux for a little while until I discovered RedHat 7.2...
Anyway I may just have to give MDK another go...
Let's add vehicle engine cooling into this discussion. The green stuff you add to your radiator fluid is to keep the stuff from Freezing -> anti-freeze. The water in your closed circuit cooling system has a boiling point of 100 Degrees Celcius. Your engine runs MUCH hotter. Where ignition takes place, you're looking at > 200 C... Of course, some of that temperature is lost in the metal engine, but still enough to make the water boil. The reason that your rad core isn't 100% steam is because the water is in constant circulation.
I'm sure if you keep this substance flowing it would be a fine coolant...
Disclaimer:
there's good IT people out there, I just haven't worked with many. I'm ranting about the bad ones I've seen (about twenty I can think of right now)
<begin rant>
IT People insist on testing patches. I agree. Good idea. Truth be told, IT people I've seen generally find testing and applying patches quite boring. They'd much rather be running around the office yelling "security hole" at every idea that comes up, or bitching about the fact they don't have any time while they are chatting on messenger or writing posts on slashdot. Truth is, many IT people haven't the faintest clue what security means. Last one I saw was obsessed about throwing the web app behind a PIX firewall (which is a good idea), but was six months behind in server patches (which IMHO should have been higher on the priority list). No PIX will defend you against IIS holes.
In fact, he couldn't even produce valid backups for us each time he was asked to restore a backup. Clearly he needed to understand that security began with recovery. Once the recover plan's in place you worry about prevention. You can't prevent 100% of the attacks, but you can recover from 100% of them with the right plan.
<end rant>
This will probably burn up my Karma even further, but whatever. I feel better
don't think anyone can learn to use a word processor without reading the manual
Uh, you don't think? Most of everyone gets by without ever having read an MS-Word manual. And they do just fine. And you can spend hours RTFMing, and still not have a clue until you get in there and learn by trial and error.
Tell someone about a pivot table in excel and they won't get it. Show them HOW to build a pivot table and they just might. THEN they'll RTFM....
And the biggest problem of them all dude.... How to migrate accounting software? Not all accounting software is written in Java you know. Many small businesses use a win32 driven accounting software that cannot be migrated, and doesn't necessarily run under WINE. When the OSS community figures that out, we're all better off...
And yes, zealots will say "just change accounting packages". Put a little thought into that one and the cost. You have to change the way your whole business operates to do that, and there's some serious costs there too.
that doesnt make any sense. even if there were 10 times as many mac users than there are now, it would still have the exact same number of security holes. if wondows had 10% of the users it does now, it would still have the same number of security holes.
Did you get a deal on that crystal ball of yours at wal-mart? C'mon, that's the least unsubstantiated assertion I've ever heard.
Thing is, (and yes, I h8 sco 2), they may have a case with the breech of contract. SCO's FUD campaign is retarded, and I don't believe they are entitled to any ownership of the Linux Kernal, but who's to say that IBM didn't breech a contract with SCO by adding System V code to the Kernel?
I mean, maybe SCO doesn't own the Sys V code and Novell does, sounds pretty compelling. Still if I have something I don't own that I tell you not to use it in a contract you have with, and you use it, don't I have a case?
SCO will have a hard time proving damages if they don't own the code. So it's plausible that they could win the breech of contract case, but not for $1 Billion.... They won't get even a fraction of that.
Slashdot Mirror
even better? I mean, You can run Apache, MySQL, PHP on windows.
And hey, you can run PHP over IIS
And hey, Sybase runs on Windows and Linux.
So under O'Reily's premise, Lamp can mean whatever the hell you want? Isn't that a pretty retarded acronym then? LAMP=Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP. Nothing more. Not a big deal, but still, at least it has a definition. Per O'reilly it can mean whatever you want it to mean. That's just stupid.
AFAIK, O'Reilly didn't coin the term LAMP. They're just bastardizing it.
So to understand you correctly, you use perl over chillisoft ASP to run your code on a non-iis box? Are you related to MacGuyver? I mean, really dude.... mod_perl on Apache is a lot less layers to have to depend on. Less stuff that can go wrong really.
Not true. There's database layers for PHP you can use that'll make your database connections heterogeneous...
ezSQL is one that comes to mind. There's plenty more.
Sounds like it's the leader if it's gaining on itself
the P in LAMP stands for PHP not Perl. PHP and MySQL are a perfect fit. Perl and Mysql are a real PITA.
Just send them to ebay. Some good deals on sdram there...
Warning: a comment in very bad taste below:
Personally, I have a hard time storing my email in a country where the building can be blown up any time. by a suicide bomber Come to think of it, USA probably isn't a good place either...
I couldn't resist. Terrible huh...
Here in BC, Canada, we had someone with a generator running off a waterwheel in the stream in his back yard. He was told that due to provincial regulations he wasn't allowed to produce hiw own electricity through Hydroelectric means. See, it's not just Americans that have anal regulatory bodies :)
Unfortunately, your ideas work with companies that are in the black. Hell, I'm the biggest fan of building software that has long term viability. However any company bleeding red needs to look towards profitability first, and then software sustainability second. Companies I've worked for were bleeding red ink bad. An approach that focuses on the long term means nothing to a company who's looking at short term survival.
I saw a company that followed the life cycle to the letter. They focused so much on the long term that the short term became a blur. They bled red ink so bad that they lost sight of what was most important - profitability. A business who doesn't turn a profit is one that has no sustainability. Until then, you focus on what the business needs today, not what they might need tomorrow.
Look, there's a lot of ad-hominims in your post, but I'm going to respond anyway. You don't know me, my curcumstances, or anything about businesses in general really.
I come from a world where small businesses have scarce resources. That means a finite amount of funds and man-hours to accomplish an infinite amount of tasks. You are faced with a choice in the development of this system: shave 10 seconds off the processing time of a purchase order, or reduce the double-entry of invoices in another module. Build invoice in one system, re-enter in another. The latter has a greater cost than the former, requiring the services of two full-time employees. The former means that the purchaser (who isn't at 1005 utilization) has to spend a bit more time doing his job. If you have to make a choice to divert resources, you don't look at the most unhappy employee, you look at the most cost effective. Worse case scenario, you hire a new purchaser who's more than happy to take on the work.
Very well put. This MS-Access based app was facing a lot of problems. It was slow, making inefficient connections to the database, etc etc... We were faced with a choice to make -> n-tier app in VB, or web based. With a large company, a web based solution seemed more appropriate. And it was. Keeping mind that RAD was very often necessary. The app worked faster and more efficiently. If our upgrade was a problem, the new employees would have bitched as well. Thing is they didn't. They worked with the system and liked it. The users before had an aversion to change. The new users didn't experience change. My point was simply they didn't like the change.
Actually, there's one written in Javascript, but why bother? That pins you down in your code, and encourages that kind of behaviour from end users. We managed to find viable alternatives, but it was with the new purchasers after the bitchy ones quit. That wasn't my point though. It was just an example.
One thing I noticed about users is they are averse to change. Here's a typical user:
You add 300 new features to their OS, KDE rocks. But they can't find their "A" drive. "I have to go to /mnt/fd0 instead?" Because of this, they will hate it. Here's the proof.
We took a company with a shit MS-access app thingy and converted it to a web based app. It ran faster, more stable, suppored more users, etc... Lots of plusses. But the select box in MS-Access lets you type in it to lookup values, rather than just the first letter like in a browser. We added hundreds of new features, but because they lost one the upgrade was crap and they couldn't use it. I'm afraid that it's all about who bitches the loudest
And SCO Unixware users are a dying breed!
I dunno.... Some of the Firefox add-ons are a web developer's dream. Stuff like live http headers and the developer toolbar make life heaven... There are good browser add-ons, you just need to look at GOOD browsers :)
That's okay. Today, even Slashdot isn't immune to being /.ed :)
Correction... Temperature where combustion occurs is > 1200C, not 200C...
Let's add vehicle engine cooling into this discussion. The green stuff you add to your radiator fluid is to keep the stuff from Freezing -> anti-freeze. The water in your closed circuit cooling system has a boiling point of 100 Degrees Celcius. Your engine runs MUCH hotter. Where ignition takes place, you're looking at > 200 C... Of course, some of that temperature is lost in the metal engine, but still enough to make the water boil. The reason that your rad core isn't 100% steam is because the water is in constant circulation. I'm sure if you keep this substance flowing it would be a fine coolant...
<begin rant>
IT People insist on testing patches. I agree. Good idea. Truth be told, IT people I've seen generally find testing and applying patches quite boring. They'd much rather be running around the office yelling "security hole" at every idea that comes up, or bitching about the fact they don't have any time while they are chatting on messenger or writing posts on slashdot. Truth is, many IT people haven't the faintest clue what security means. Last one I saw was obsessed about throwing the web app behind a PIX firewall (which is a good idea), but was six months behind in server patches (which IMHO should have been higher on the priority list). No PIX will defend you against IIS holes.
In fact, he couldn't even produce valid backups for us each time he was asked to restore a backup. Clearly he needed to understand that security began with recovery. Once the recover plan's in place you worry about prevention. You can't prevent 100% of the attacks, but you can recover from 100% of them with the right plan. <end rant>
This will probably burn up my Karma even further, but whatever. I feel better
Uh, you don't think? Most of everyone gets by without ever having read an MS-Word manual. And they do just fine. And you can spend hours RTFMing, and still not have a clue until you get in there and learn by trial and error.
Tell someone about a pivot table in excel and they won't get it. Show them HOW to build a pivot table and they just might. THEN they'll RTFM....
And the biggest problem of them all dude.... How to migrate accounting software? Not all accounting software is written in Java you know. Many small businesses use a win32 driven accounting software that cannot be migrated, and doesn't necessarily run under WINE. When the OSS community figures that out, we're all better off...
And yes, zealots will say "just change accounting packages". Put a little thought into that one and the cost. You have to change the way your whole business operates to do that, and there's some serious costs there too.
IANAL but I play one on Slashdot...
Thing is, (and yes, I h8 sco 2), they may have a case with the breech of contract. SCO's FUD campaign is retarded, and I don't believe they are entitled to any ownership of the Linux Kernal, but who's to say that IBM didn't breech a contract with SCO by adding System V code to the Kernel?
I mean, maybe SCO doesn't own the Sys V code and Novell does, sounds pretty compelling. Still if I have something I don't own that I tell you not to use it in a contract you have with, and you use it, don't I have a case?
SCO will have a hard time proving damages if they don't own the code. So it's plausible that they could win the breech of contract case, but not for $1 Billion.... They won't get even a fraction of that.