You can draw fairly strong parallels to Windows in this respect, just as Windows had the Win32 API (and later MFC, and then.NET) and if you adhered to these APIs your app would be portable across Windows systems catering only to differences in screen resolutions
IIRC, even adhering to those APIs wouldn't guarantee portability to Microsoft's embedded OS platforms like WinCE.
Microsoft's monopoly got started with DOS and IBM's market strength, but it was maintained due to anti-competitive practices like per-processor licensing agreements. This is well documented in the conclusions of law and other filings from the case. If DOS and IBM were major factors, then OS/2 would surely hold the market dominant position today.
Infoworld and Windows [was Re:Ally McBeal?!]
on
2010 Geek IQ Test
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
And what's with all the Windows questions?
Trade magazine shilling for $$$ + abusive monopolist = lot's of free advertising and concocted credibility
You should qualify that statement with your experience. There are valid software metrics that aren't tied to lines of code. I recommend reading Applied Software Measurement by Capers Jones.
OS/2 would have saved the industry a ton of money in the long run. Better robustness, a more extensible user interface, better performance,... Even outside of OS/2, if it wasn't for the Microsoft monopoly, the computing industry would have benefited from competition in the operating system arena bringing more innovation and a better user experience. Microsoft's monopoly has set us back at least 20 years. Windows is still playing catch-up to the design of OS/2.
Posting as "Anonymous Coward" and not citing any sources doesn't lend much credibility to your opinion. In fact, I've never heard this stated before outside of anti-OS/2 FUDsters in the newsgroups. It doesn't reconcile very well with this statement, "Ziff-Davis Labs observed a 90 percent improvement in throughput when adding one processor, and a 300 percent improvement when adding three processors." from http://www.databook.bz/?page_id=223
I guess if you've already been duped by the special interests with the big pockets, you could already be doing that. Many middle to lower income people have been duped into dressing as a parody of native americans to throw tea into bodies of water as they march toward the poverty line.
You post a rant like that about Sony and then look towards Microsoft. ??? You must really be a masochist! I haven't seen Sony even come close to Microsoft; after all, Microsoft harmed an entire industry (PC)!
Simple counting algorithm? I'm sure it is, but it is probably buried in many 3GL abstraction layers and replicated in many different places in the code. The various wrappers around the algorithm used by the different suppliers is probably patented due to IP production requirements forced upon the software developers in an effort to justify too many layers of management.
> That proportion seems a little high for say, IT workers, who'd probably have little use for customer data
Imagine you were downsized in an economy that has ~10% unemployment, and you had good reason not to relocate from a high-unemployment area. IT is one area where it is really easy to start your own company with very little startup cost. It is also common due to office politics to have a really good idea ignored. You are now free to go to the customers directly and say, "I can save you $$$ over my old company!", and back up your claims with real data. This is a common start-up company recipe.
... by doing more analysis and design before you write the software. Automate as much of you software processes as possible. If you can model your analysis, test the analysis models, and generate the analysis models directly into code, you will eliminate a large amount of test and development time. You also get to avoid the mind-numbing repetition involved in a lot of the aspects of every-day 3GL coding life. (Some of which can also be avoided by developing good reuse libraries, but not all.)
If you don't do your analysis, your design's going to be flawed. OTOH, you jumped right into OOPL in the text without mentioning any OOD methods, so maybe you actually mean pseudo-OOD, first. >;->
Those of us who are older than DOS, know that the operating system market existed before Microsoft, and that IBM (or maybe better stated, the DOJ) caused the operating system market to really take off. Microsoft pretty much kept it in a stranglehold, in the personal computer market, once it established it's monopoly via anti-competitive practices. Once again, DOJ action was required to restore it to the not-quite-healthy state it is in today. The embedded devices operating system market operated pretty much wholly independent of Microsoft until around ten years ago. Microsoft hasn't ever really offered a good operating system choice in the embedded market. (Although they had an opportunity when rich application clients started coming into demand.) Robustness was always a big stumbling block, back then, and openness is what will trip them up today.
Sounds like Microsoft hasn't learned much from it's AutoPC days. If this article is on target, then the phone companies probably shouldn't waste time developing Windows Phone 7 platforms.
The article specifically mentions older out of production vehicles for examples. It doesn't really discuss CAFE standards.
Your answer is also wrong, because it doesn't include sales figures and mileage increase possible per vehicle type. The contrived example in the study speaks more about math capabilities than the need to change fuel economy ratings. Dollars per miles driven would be more useful to consumers too stupid to do the math. OTOH, those people might not even bother to track how many miles they drive, so you would really have to put a cost for the average driver number. The automakers lobby would quickly act to make sure it is the lowest number possible presented to the consumer, i.e., dollars per day, and present it in couched terms, i.e., "Isn't your family's safety worth an extra dollar a day?".
Valid points, but they still don't support the broad statement originally posited. You might remove the overstepping boundary of authority element, but you can still have a discipline element that exceeds the boundary of the law.
> side note: Homeschooling parents are looking pretty smart, aren't they?
This statement is nonsense. Is the implication that this would be a lessor news event if the students were posting these things about their parent(s)? That the principal is actually a pedophile and zero home-school parents are? That zero home-schooled kids would do such a thing?
I would say that there is no certainty in any of these cases.
Slashdot Mirror
You can draw fairly strong parallels to Windows in this respect, just as Windows had the Win32 API (and later MFC, and then .NET) and if you adhered to these APIs your app would be portable across Windows systems catering only to differences in screen resolutions
IIRC, even adhering to those APIs wouldn't guarantee portability to Microsoft's embedded OS platforms like WinCE.
Microsoft's monopoly got started with DOS and IBM's market strength, but it was maintained due to anti-competitive practices like per-processor licensing agreements. This is well documented in the conclusions of law and other filings from the case. If DOS and IBM were major factors, then OS/2 would surely hold the market dominant position today.
And what's with all the Windows questions?
Trade magazine shilling for $$$ + abusive monopolist = lot's of free advertising and concocted credibility
... by buying a copy of Applied Software Measurement by Capers Jones. There's enough data in that book to extrapolate the cost.
You should qualify that statement with your experience. There are valid software metrics that aren't tied to lines of code. I recommend reading Applied Software Measurement by Capers Jones.
OS/2 would have saved the industry a ton of money in the long run. Better robustness, a more extensible user interface, better performance, ... Even outside of OS/2, if it wasn't for the Microsoft monopoly, the computing industry would have benefited from competition in the operating system arena bringing more innovation and a better user experience. Microsoft's monopoly has set us back at least 20 years. Windows is still playing catch-up to the design of OS/2.
Posting as "Anonymous Coward" and not citing any sources doesn't lend much credibility to your opinion. In fact, I've never heard this stated before outside of anti-OS/2 FUDsters in the newsgroups. It doesn't reconcile very well with this statement, "Ziff-Davis Labs observed a 90 percent improvement in throughput when adding one processor, and a 300 percent improvement when adding three processors." from http://www.databook.bz/?page_id=223
For those interested in OS/2 SMP: http://www.edm2.com/index.php/OS/2's_Symmetrical_Multiprocessing_Demystified
I guess if you've already been duped by the special interests with the big pockets, you could already be doing that. Many middle to lower income people have been duped into dressing as a parody of native americans to throw tea into bodies of water as they march toward the poverty line.
OK, but why are you using Windows if you don't trust Microsoft?
You post a rant like that about Sony and then look towards Microsoft. ??? You must really be a masochist! I haven't seen Sony even come close to Microsoft; after all, Microsoft harmed an entire industry (PC)!
Simple counting algorithm? I'm sure it is, but it is probably buried in many 3GL abstraction layers and replicated in many different places in the code. The various wrappers around the algorithm used by the different suppliers is probably patented due to IP production requirements forced upon the software developers in an effort to justify too many layers of management.
> That proportion seems a little high for say, IT workers, who'd probably have little use for customer data
Imagine you were downsized in an economy that has ~10% unemployment, and you had good reason not to relocate from a high-unemployment area. IT is one area where it is really easy to start your own company with very little startup cost. It is also common due to office politics to have a really good idea ignored. You are now free to go to the customers directly and say, "I can save you $$$ over my old company!", and back up your claims with real data. This is a common start-up company recipe.
How could you leave a company and not take a lot of the data with you? ???
... by doing more analysis and design before you write the software. Automate as much of you software processes as possible. If you can model your analysis, test the analysis models, and generate the analysis models directly into code, you will eliminate a large amount of test and development time. You also get to avoid the mind-numbing repetition involved in a lot of the aspects of every-day 3GL coding life. (Some of which can also be avoided by developing good reuse libraries, but not all.)
Hmmm... So instead of writing tests to ensure the code passes, you write code to ensure the tests pass? >;->
If you don't do your analysis, your design's going to be flawed. OTOH, you jumped right into OOPL in the text without mentioning any OOD methods, so maybe you actually mean pseudo-OOD, first. >;->
Trouble is the small-government cheerleaders voted some of the worst oppressors of civil liberties, Reagan and Bush2, into office.
Those of us who are older than DOS, know that the operating system market existed before Microsoft, and that IBM (or maybe better stated, the DOJ) caused the operating system market to really take off. Microsoft pretty much kept it in a stranglehold, in the personal computer market, once it established it's monopoly via anti-competitive practices. Once again, DOJ action was required to restore it to the not-quite-healthy state it is in today.
The embedded devices operating system market operated pretty much wholly independent of Microsoft until around ten years ago. Microsoft hasn't ever really offered a good operating system choice in the embedded market. (Although they had an opportunity when rich application clients started coming into demand.) Robustness was always a big stumbling block, back then, and openness is what will trip them up today.
Watch out for every Windows PC coming preloaded with a Windows 7 mobile phone. I would put a smiley, but based on Microsoft's history ...
Sounds like Microsoft hasn't learned much from it's AutoPC days. If this article is on target, then the phone companies probably shouldn't waste time developing Windows Phone 7 platforms.
For Google Wave?
... but you're fooling yourself if you think that Windows 7 is going to be any less broke. Good advice if you want to stick with Windows.
The article specifically mentions older out of production vehicles for examples. It doesn't really discuss CAFE standards.
Your answer is also wrong, because it doesn't include sales figures and mileage increase possible per vehicle type. The contrived example in the study speaks more about math capabilities than the need to change fuel economy ratings. Dollars per miles driven would be more useful to consumers too stupid to do the math. OTOH, those people might not even bother to track how many miles they drive, so you would really have to put a cost for the average driver number. The automakers lobby would quickly act to make sure it is the lowest number possible presented to the consumer, i.e., dollars per day, and present it in couched terms, i.e., "Isn't your family's safety worth an extra dollar a day?".
Valid points, but they still don't support the broad statement originally posited. You might remove the overstepping boundary of authority element, but you can still have a discipline element that exceeds the boundary of the law.
> side note: Homeschooling parents are looking pretty smart, aren't they?
This statement is nonsense. Is the implication that this would be a lessor news event if the students were posting these things about their parent(s)? That the principal is actually a pedophile and zero home-school parents are? That zero home-schooled kids would do such a thing?
I would say that there is no certainty in any of these cases.