If cell phones are a really that powerful, couldn't ET just get in a plane and phone home? Or, more to the point, if there are aliens, wouldn't they hear our cell phones? (And maybe Direc TV too?)
The argument for portable skills is pretty persuasive. People need to know how to use MS-Word, Excel, and Access.
So, I was wondering... couldn't the open source community just clone these applications? I mean, without the aborts, the faults, and the bugs -- I am sure that open source programmers could do this. Whicb brings me to my next question: would we rather have open source software be good (and not have the MS menu structure and bloat) or would we rather have open source win (clone MS-Word, kick some MS azs.)
Shouldn't there stuff have worked a long time ago? Let's see.... Windows NT 3.51 (1995 or so), Windows NT 4,... Windows 2000.
Crash Crash Crash.
And now, supposedly, it works. I have spent so many of my years as a professional dealing with MS-Bugs that I just can't believe it. Maybe this is MS-Bugs 2.0.
See "Domain-Driven Design" by Eric Evans. (Addison-Wesely, 2004).
I general, I recommend writing about the system from different points of view, using different types of diagrams, even if it means some redundant information.
Let me put forward a thought: A lot of software is written with ulterior motives in mind. Example: I use a lot of the MS stuff because I have to, and most everything that they do seems needlessly complicated. It has to be part of ".Net", or use ADO, or MAPI, or whatever other latest "standard" that they have invented. Maybe next year it is a new standard. They just cannot seem to make up theire mind. Or, for that matter, look at what happened to the Netscape browser, or Communicator, or whatever that bloated piece of garbage is that AOL created.
Now, I am casting a quick glance -- I know that. But the software that is out there that is really great was written because someone wanted to build something great. I do not think that great software is about Linux winning over Windows. A few names: Perl, Apache, gcc, Python, TCL, Emacs. I think that all of these are available for Windows. If I wrote something that was I thought was really good, I would want it to be available to the widest possible audience. I would not like to think that I would be so stingy that I would want to keep my software only for Linux platforms.
I am being a little selfish here. I used Windows because I have to. But just once, I would like to wake up, sit down at my keyboard for more than hour, and not have to think to myself, "My God, what a piece of **CRAP**" If open source can make that so, so be it. I cannot believe how many bugs I am always running into on Windows systems.
That having been said, I also use Perl and VIM on Windows systems. I am glad that these packages are not restricted to Linux.
'nuff said.
Dr. Pluto Madre
People are a lot more complicated than technical problems. If you can, and especially if you need to, learn to understand people. Almost no one accomplishes anything alone, with a few exceptions -- but those are very few. If you can learn to understand, get a long with, and possibly even lead your fellow man and be highly productive doing so, that is a worthwhile achievement in itself.
On the other hand, crunching code or twiddling bits or trying to resolve relativistic and quantum physics might be fun or gratifying, but most of us aren't going to get long-term, deep satisfaction (or make a living) from it.
Here is what I keep hearing: Just because there are more people looking at the code does not mean that the code is better.
The problem is..... that Linux IS better. Does it matter if we can not articulate the exact reasons? Maybe the Linux coders care more; we know who the Linux coders are, but who wrote the Microsoft kernel code (and who put all those expletives in there)? I have Linux servers and Windows servers; which do you think is more reliable?
Beware of people using rationalized arguments to come up with irrational conclusions that can not be supported.
BTW, I have a BlackBerry pager, and it does NOT run Windows CE. I feel very fortunate.
Intuitive to whom? Does anyone know what intuitive really means for programmers? I would not mind never seeing another IDE, mysef, but some people find these very intuitive.
Slashdot Mirror
If cell phones are a really that powerful, couldn't ET just get in a plane and phone home? Or, more to the point, if there are aliens, wouldn't they hear our cell phones? (And maybe Direc TV too?)
The argument for portable skills is pretty persuasive. People need to know how to use MS-Word, Excel, and Access. So, I was wondering ... couldn't the open source community just clone these applications? I mean, without the aborts, the faults, and the bugs -- I am sure that open source programmers could do this. Whicb brings me to my next question: would we rather have open source software be good (and not have the MS menu structure and bloat) or would we rather have open source win (clone MS-Word, kick some MS azs.)
Shouldn't there stuff have worked a long time ago? Let's see.... Windows NT 3.51 (1995 or so), Windows NT 4, ... Windows 2000.
Crash Crash Crash.
And now, supposedly, it works. I have spent so many of my years as a professional dealing with MS-Bugs that I just can't believe it. Maybe this is MS-Bugs 2.0.
See "Domain-Driven Design" by Eric Evans. (Addison-Wesely, 2004). I general, I recommend writing about the system from different points of view, using different types of diagrams, even if it means some redundant information.
If you can do it for BattleStar, why not? Now let's see, who could we cast as Kirk....
Let me put forward a thought: A lot of software is written with ulterior motives in mind. Example: I use a lot of the MS stuff because I have to, and most everything that they do seems needlessly complicated. It has to be part of ".Net", or use ADO, or MAPI, or whatever other latest "standard" that they have invented. Maybe next year it is a new standard. They just cannot seem to make up theire mind. Or, for that matter, look at what happened to the Netscape browser, or Communicator, or whatever that bloated piece of garbage is that AOL created. Now, I am casting a quick glance -- I know that. But the software that is out there that is really great was written because someone wanted to build something great. I do not think that great software is about Linux winning over Windows. A few names: Perl, Apache, gcc, Python, TCL, Emacs. I think that all of these are available for Windows. If I wrote something that was I thought was really good, I would want it to be available to the widest possible audience. I would not like to think that I would be so stingy that I would want to keep my software only for Linux platforms. I am being a little selfish here. I used Windows because I have to. But just once, I would like to wake up, sit down at my keyboard for more than hour, and not have to think to myself, "My God, what a piece of **CRAP**" If open source can make that so, so be it. I cannot believe how many bugs I am always running into on Windows systems. That having been said, I also use Perl and VIM on Windows systems. I am glad that these packages are not restricted to Linux. 'nuff said. Dr. Pluto Madre
People are a lot more complicated than technical problems. If you can, and especially if you need to, learn to understand people. Almost no one accomplishes anything alone, with a few exceptions -- but those are very few. If you can learn to understand, get a long with, and possibly even lead your fellow man and be highly productive doing so, that is a worthwhile achievement in itself. On the other hand, crunching code or twiddling bits or trying to resolve relativistic and quantum physics might be fun or gratifying, but most of us aren't going to get long-term, deep satisfaction (or make a living) from it.
Here is what I keep hearing: Just because there are more people looking at the code does not mean that the code is better.
The problem is
Beware of people using rationalized arguments to come up with irrational conclusions that can not be supported.
BTW, I have a BlackBerry pager, and it does NOT run Windows CE. I feel very fortunate.
Intuitive to whom? Does anyone know what intuitive really means for programmers? I would not mind never seeing another IDE, mysef, but some people find these very intuitive.