A business object server is a component of a multi-tier application structure. The BOS sits between the interface and the RDBMS. The BOS allows a developer to specify object types, attributes, relationships, policies. These business objects can be basically anything from a cad drawing to a issue artifact to a engine part. The BOS takes care of this data stored within the RDBMS as well as indexing (however custom indexing is possible).
Business object servers are currently very expensive investments and this is why it is only used by the big companies to manage big resources. They were originally developed for CAD configuration management. The use of a bos to config managagement of engineering data is known as Product Data Management or PDM. The new buz word in the IT boardrooms is PLM or Product Lifecycle Management. This is basically where you use the BOS and it's frameworks to allow for lifecycle control of products including project managment and document digitization.
A BOS would allow for a developer to model a business down to it's work products and work flows and allow for automation of these workflows including user notifications and the such.
Take a look at Matrix One. Not that I particularily love these guy's but their core engine is very well built. The basic underlying framework they have come up with is extremely flexible. It can be used to automate pretty much any process you can throw at it. The best thing about it is it handles all your Oracle SQL for you. The programmer just needs to interface with the BOS via their object relational query language.
I've been trying to light the torches to start up an open source BOS but it is really just now in the very early stages as such a project would be a massive undertaking like on the magnitude of the Mozilla project. Not something I could build in one of my lifetimes. I'd need dozens of developers to pull it together.
I know that the demand will be there as my company alone is currently forking out millions of dollars a year for these systems and deployments on their frameworks. And our IT forcasts are showing that it will only increase as time progresses.
A big move has already startedto move to Business Object Servers to host enterprise level application deployments. BOS's are currently used to run the core engineering departments of most F500 companies. These BOS's typically use a Query Language that is catered to printing and expanding data of and from business objects. I currently use a language called MQL which stands for Matrix Query Language. I have talked to some developers who use XML and they say that is has similarities.
Basically any Query language should alow developers to build data models quickly without having to worry about the complexities of managing the data base. Most BOS's use a RDBMS in the background and manage all the SQL's under to the database.
If you want to find an area where the bucks are.. BOS's are it. The big companies are spending billions on these systems and they deployements are projected to only increase.
We were able to spec, build and deploy an enterprise HR Performance and Development system for a fraction of the cost and time with these systems. The only issue with these multi-teir systems is that they are very resource intensive but then again, processors and memory is getting cheaper by the day.
Hmmm how about an open source BOS...:]
With C#, stuck in windoze
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
so if you're doing C# and you're foundations in OOP is rock-solid, there really isn't any difference whether you're coding C# or Java.
He kind of forgot that there are many programmers and customers who DON'T want to deploy their systems on win32. With Java apps, you don't have to. In fact you can choose almost any operating system and hardware. Anybody who chooses C# over Java for enterprise deployments is truly a MicroWeenie.
The only way that those microsofties can make a browser that comes close to the flexibility, security and stability of Mozilla is to completely re-write IE. The only reason IE is fast is because they spent too much time optimizing their code trees eliminating their ability to debug the code.
IE will never be able to come close to the extensionability of Mozilla. In fact the only application that I see out there that comes close to Mozilla's extensions ability is Eclipse, but that's not a browser (yet...).
I've written some rather complex DHTML apps and IE has shown me many times that the underlying frameworks are a big bowl of spagetti. Sure it's fast but try to debug anything complex and forget it.
Porting my JS libs from IE to Mozilla was a painful experience but since doing that about 3 years ago, I've never looked back. I love the feeling of being able to report a bug to developers and acutually have it fixed. With microsoft, I have always been told to pay first then maybe somebody will read my report and ultimately throw the report into the garbage.
I still have to write apps that ultimately have to support IE 5.5 sp2+ but they are originally built on Mozilla (1.3+).
error.stack==happiness:]
Good time for Canadian Movie Makers
on
The Long Tail
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
If this is true, the Canadian movie business would finally find it's own. Up to now, the movies that are produced in canada simply have not received the exposure that they deserve. Many of the worlds best directors, writers and editors are canadian but unfortunately most of them now work in CA doing what they don't want to.
Hmmm Maybe it's time to get the Panasonic 24 fps DV cam:]
I have seen forecasts for my F500 employer and they confirm that their future shows migrations to more and more web based applications.
This is probably the case for every F500 company out there as stock holders are demanding the improved efficency that the intra/extranet was supposed to offer.
I am a self taught programmer who started programming spreadsheets about 6 years ago. I coded alot of VB and many of the apps I wrote are still functioning to this day. At the time that I moved away from VB was due to terrible experience trying to build a large VBA application on Access.
Microsoft always stated that VB was Object Oriented language and at the time, I had no idea what that really meant. However after doing extensive OOP in Java and JavaScript, I know what OOP really was and that VB was not it. Their concept that a Module was the `object` is too simple to be useful and as such VB apps can only be pushed so far.
Maybe, I would consider looking at VB if they have real OO programming and if the pay was good enough for me to consider the job. In the meantime I perfer hacking on my Unix boxes.
You have obviously not programmed in a real language. VB is way too wordy to be readable, the underlying object structure that M$ throws at you is too redundant and obfuscated to be efficient. I have written many, albeit reasonably stable, application in VB to know it's serious shortcomings.
Don't be blind, open your eyes to real programming languages and you will never look back. However if you wish to live in a Microsoft world along with all the other M$ speudo programmers making very little, be my guest.
I personally turn down VB projects all the time. Instead, I currently only accept Java, python and tcl based based projects. If I did client applications, they would most likely be in C/C++ but for the last few years I've been working on J2EE projects where VB is an option but... why?
Besides, VB is not where the real cool programming jobs are anyway. There are way too many bad VB programmers to be appreciated as a good VB programmer. More is NOT better.
I did ton's of research on SVCS's before choosing Subversion and I absolutely love it. Sure, the core design is not cvsgraph friendly but that will come in time. The underlying design of Subversion is extremely sound and could easilly be the backbone for much more that software version control systems.
I have even started setting up my own personal repositories to track my personal documentation that I use across my multiple platforms / computers.
CVS, although very powerful was simply too difficult to configure and the learning curve for my peers was way too high. With subversion and tortoisesvn (a win32 explorer extension) it is so easy it's scary.
Those svn guy's are some pretty damn good hackers and I'd find it hard to slam them! But the best way to get attention is to slam the REAL competition.
In the case of the (a) encoder and decoder manufacturer sublicenses: For (a) (1) branded encoder and decoder products sold both to end users and on an OEM basis for incorporation into personal computers but not part of an operating system...
I read that this applies to sold software not free software. Licence free for free (OS) software?
H.264/AVC is open and extremely powerful. Why bother with another protocol?
From Apple Tiger h.264 page: Not only is H.264/AVC very efficient, providing extremely high quality in smaller files, but H.264/AVC is also scalable, producing video for everything from 3G for mobile phones to High Definition (HD). H.264/AVC can create great-looking 3G mobile content at 50-160 Kbps, excellent Standard Definition (SD) video at 800-1500 Kbps, beautiful HD video (1280x720, 24p) at 5-7 Mbps and full HD video (1920x1080, 24p) at 7-9 Mbps. So at today's SD DVD data rates, H.264/AVC can deliver full HD. In fact, H.264/AVC was ratified by the DVD Forum for inclusion in the next-generation HD DVD format.
Pure capitalism that does not have value based monitoring and controls will result in econimies that are profit not service based. All corporations that have monopolistic capabilities must be controled and countered by government and institutional policies.
Also billie knows that the end is nigh. He's just trying to slow time down so he can point the company in other directions. (and sell his personal M$ securities)
For names that make sense and are acronyms of your product, it is not a bad idea. However, the ownership of this trademark should be to an open non-profit organization that could easilly live for ever in the free domain.
Open source trademarks should never be in the private domain. Obviously, global trademarks are probably fiscally not practical but North American ones should be cheap enough (?)
I have no idea how to set up such an organization but I'm sure their out there.
I for one am working on the early stages of an open source project that would be worth while to trademark. Its name is catchy, descriptive and short and I am now looking into releasing the ownership into the open domain (once I find out how).
To be honest, I can't think of any other reason besides similarity.
I've programmed alot with JavaScript and love it but programmed enough with Python to recognize its power.
Scripting layers should only be considered a prototyping layer to try out new methods and techniquies. Ultimately the stablized scriping code should be ported to Java in this case or let's say a C'ish language for it's final production ready destination.
If you are doing alot of deep OO programming, Python is best but if you are using OO just for procedural and namespace encapsulation JavaScript is just fine.
I admit I'm completely ignorant when it comes to Ruby. I will probably continue in such a vain as Python is a pretty good place to be.
There are dozens but they do not sit in the normal desktop computer realm. Such an architecture would be well suited for low cost server arrays that could run an app like compler, rendering or seti farms.
Once such a system is set up properly, it could be self maintaining with a significant reduction in hardware and energy and maintenance costs.
I know that JavaScript does not have the same capabilities for server based OO apps as Ruby or Python (yet), but it is still a very competent language nonetheless for small to medium sized apps.
JavaScript's similarity to Java can also be helpful for readability.
The Moz guy's are still hacking the core of Rhino and are releasing new version regularly.
Slashdot Mirror
A business object server is a component of a multi-tier application structure. The BOS sits between the interface and the RDBMS. The BOS allows a developer to specify object types, attributes, relationships, policies. These business objects can be basically anything from a cad drawing to a issue artifact to a engine part. The BOS takes care of this data stored within the RDBMS as well as indexing (however custom indexing is possible).
Business object servers are currently very expensive investments and this is why it is only used by the big companies to manage big resources. They were originally developed for CAD configuration management. The use of a bos to config managagement of engineering data is known as Product Data Management or PDM. The new buz word in the IT boardrooms is PLM or Product Lifecycle Management. This is basically where you use the BOS and it's frameworks to allow for lifecycle control of products including project managment and document digitization.
A BOS would allow for a developer to model a business down to it's work products and work flows and allow for automation of these workflows including user notifications and the such.
Take a look at Matrix One. Not that I particularily love these guy's but their core engine is very well built. The basic underlying framework they have come up with is extremely flexible. It can be used to automate pretty much any process you can throw at it. The best thing about it is it handles all your Oracle SQL for you. The programmer just needs to interface with the BOS via their object relational query language.
I've been trying to light the torches to start up an open source BOS but it is really just now in the very early stages as such a project would be a massive undertaking like on the magnitude of the Mozilla project. Not something I could build in one of my lifetimes. I'd need dozens of developers to pull it together.
I know that the demand will be there as my company alone is currently forking out millions of dollars a year for these systems and deployments on their frameworks. And our IT forcasts are showing that it will only increase as time progresses.
A big move has already startedto move to Business Object Servers to host enterprise level application deployments. BOS's are currently used to run the core engineering departments of most F500 companies. These BOS's typically use a Query Language that is catered to printing and expanding data of and from business objects. I currently use a language called MQL which stands for Matrix Query Language. I have talked to some developers who use XML and they say that is has similarities.
:]
Basically any Query language should alow developers to build data models quickly without having to worry about the complexities of managing the data base. Most BOS's use a RDBMS in the background and manage all the SQL's under to the database.
If you want to find an area where the bucks are.. BOS's are it. The big companies are spending billions on these systems and they deployements are projected to only increase.
We were able to spec, build and deploy an enterprise HR Performance and Development system for a fraction of the cost and time with these systems. The only issue with these multi-teir systems is that they are very resource intensive but then again, processors and memory is getting cheaper by the day.
Hmmm how about an open source BOS...
He kind of forgot that there are many programmers and customers who DON'T want to deploy their systems on win32. With Java apps, you don't have to. In fact you can choose almost any operating system and hardware. Anybody who chooses C# over Java for enterprise deployments is truly a MicroWeenie.
:]
I much prefer my 8 processor HP UX box any day
The only way that those microsofties can make a browser that comes close to the flexibility, security and stability of Mozilla is to completely re-write IE. The only reason IE is fast is because they spent too much time optimizing their code trees eliminating their ability to debug the code.
:]
IE will never be able to come close to the extensionability of Mozilla. In fact the only application that I see out there that comes close to Mozilla's extensions ability is Eclipse, but that's not a browser (yet...).
I've written some rather complex DHTML apps and IE has shown me many times that the underlying frameworks are a big bowl of spagetti. Sure it's fast but try to debug anything complex and forget it.
Porting my JS libs from IE to Mozilla was a painful experience but since doing that about 3 years ago, I've never looked back. I love the feeling of being able to report a bug to developers and acutually have it fixed. With microsoft, I have always been told to pay first then maybe somebody will read my report and ultimately throw the report into the garbage.
I still have to write apps that ultimately have to support IE 5.5 sp2+ but they are originally built on Mozilla (1.3+).
error.stack==happiness
If this is true, the Canadian movie business would finally find it's own. Up to now, the movies that are produced in canada simply have not received the exposure that they deserve. Many of the worlds best directors, writers and editors are canadian but unfortunately most of them now work in CA doing what they don't want to.
:]
Hmmm Maybe it's time to get the Panasonic 24 fps DV cam
I have seen forecasts for my F500 employer and they confirm that their future shows migrations to more and more web based applications.
This is probably the case for every F500 company out there as stock holders are demanding the improved efficency that the intra/extranet was supposed to offer.
You're right, I was a little harsh with my post.
I am a self taught programmer who started programming spreadsheets about 6 years ago. I coded alot of VB and many of the apps I wrote are still functioning to this day. At the time that I moved away from VB was due to terrible experience trying to build a large VBA application on Access.
Microsoft always stated that VB was Object Oriented language and at the time, I had no idea what that really meant. However after doing extensive OOP in Java and JavaScript, I know what OOP really was and that VB was not it. Their concept that a Module was the `object` is too simple to be useful and as such VB apps can only be pushed so far.
Maybe, I would consider looking at VB if they have real OO programming and if the pay was good enough for me to consider the job. In the meantime I perfer hacking on my Unix boxes.
Tim
You have obviously not programmed in a real language. VB is way too wordy to be readable, the underlying object structure that M$ throws at you is too redundant and obfuscated to be efficient. I have written many, albeit reasonably stable, application in VB to know it's serious shortcomings.
Don't be blind, open your eyes to real programming languages and you will never look back. However if you wish to live in a Microsoft world along with all the other M$ speudo programmers making very little, be my guest.
I personally turn down VB projects all the time. Instead, I currently only accept Java, python and tcl based based projects. If I did client applications, they would most likely be in C/C++ but for the last few years I've been working on J2EE projects where VB is an option but... why?
Besides, VB is not where the real cool programming jobs are anyway. There are way too many bad VB programmers to be appreciated as a good VB programmer. More is NOT better.
JsD
I did ton's of research on SVCS's before choosing Subversion and I absolutely love it. Sure, the core design is not cvsgraph friendly but that will come in time. The underlying design of Subversion is extremely sound and could easilly be the backbone for much more that software version control systems.
I have even started setting up my own personal repositories to track my personal documentation that I use across my multiple platforms / computers.
CVS, although very powerful was simply too difficult to configure and the learning curve for my peers was way too high. With subversion and tortoisesvn (a win32 explorer extension) it is so easy it's scary.
Those svn guy's are some pretty damn good hackers and I'd find it hard to slam them! But the best way to get attention is to slam the REAL competition.
I wonder if the guy who wrote this is related to the Driv3r developers. I sense similar levels of passion when it comes to physics.
Very nice game!
VPC was dog slow no matter what version I used on my 500 mhz iceBook. However, I did only have 256 mb of ram at the time.
I wonder if they will be able to leverage Quartz Extreme (with good video cards of course)?
There was one awesome game I was totally addicted to on Amiga. You drove a hot rod car around a track elevated in the air with jumps and bot cars.
The physics were scary good (for the time).
Anybody remember this game?
Why not just use bash under cygwin?
I do, but as most would agree the current command prompt UI totally sucks. I'm hoping that this new distrib will include a better UI.
I have no interest in any M$ languages except to have some M$ winAPI extensions that I can shell from my python or bash scripts running in cygwin.
Because I unfortunately have to hack on a windoze box, I would love to see an improved command shell.
The current command shell just plain sucks when compared to OSX's or KDE's shells.
I can't wait to install.
truth={ moz: "sweet" }
Although I will never use it as I'm totally happy with Moz, more options is always better.
This will only help stay M$'s attempts to kill the internet with longhorn.
Licence snippet:
In the case of the (a) encoder and decoder manufacturer sublicenses:
For (a) (1) branded encoder and decoder products sold both to end users and on an OEM
basis for incorporation into personal computers but not part of an operating system...
I read that this applies to sold software not free software. Licence free for free (OS) software?
H.264/AVC is open and extremely powerful. Why bother with another protocol?
From Apple Tiger h.264 page:
Not only is H.264/AVC very efficient, providing extremely high quality in smaller files, but H.264/AVC is also scalable, producing video for everything from 3G for mobile phones to High Definition (HD). H.264/AVC can create great-looking 3G mobile content at 50-160 Kbps, excellent Standard Definition (SD) video at 800-1500 Kbps, beautiful HD video (1280x720, 24p) at 5-7 Mbps and full HD video (1920x1080, 24p) at 7-9 Mbps. So at today's SD DVD data rates, H.264/AVC can deliver full HD. In fact, H.264/AVC was ratified by the DVD Forum for inclusion in the next-generation HD DVD format.
Pure capitalism that does not have value based monitoring and controls will result in econimies that are profit not service based. All corporations that have monopolistic capabilities must be controled and countered by government and institutional policies.
Also billie knows that the end is nigh. He's just trying to slow time down so he can point the company in other directions. (and sell his personal M$ securities)
JsD
For names that make sense and are acronyms of your product, it is not a bad idea. However, the ownership of this trademark should be to an open non-profit organization that could easilly live for ever in the free domain.
Open source trademarks should never be in the private domain. Obviously, global trademarks are probably fiscally not practical but North American ones should be cheap enough (?)
I have no idea how to set up such an organization but I'm sure their out there.
I for one am working on the early stages of an open source project that would be worth while to trademark. Its name is catchy, descriptive and short and I am now looking into releasing the ownership into the open domain (once I find out how).
Does anybody have good testing of OSX 10.2, 10.3?
I am guessing that with 10.3 systems are much lower than 1%
I wonder if they will help me port Space Invaders from my white Comodore Pet.
Now if only I could find that tape...
As subversion has shown, with a db based file system, a version controlled file system can be developed intuitively and effectively.
I hope that sun's new FS is `ready to go` if users would like to add such features that are built into the FS.
To be honest, I can't think of any other reason besides similarity.
I've programmed alot with JavaScript and love it but programmed enough with Python to recognize its power.
Scripting layers should only be considered a prototyping layer to try out new methods and techniquies. Ultimately the stablized scriping code should be ported to Java in this case or let's say a C'ish language for it's final production ready destination.
If you are doing alot of deep OO programming, Python is best but if you are using OO just for procedural and namespace encapsulation JavaScript is just fine.
I admit I'm completely ignorant when it comes to Ruby. I will probably continue in such a vain as Python is a pretty good place to be.
Hey, how about a TCL - Java bridge???
There are dozens but they do not sit in the normal desktop computer realm. Such an architecture would be well suited for low cost server arrays that could run an app like compler, rendering or seti farms.
Once such a system is set up properly, it could be self maintaining with a significant reduction in hardware and energy and maintenance costs.
I know that JavaScript does not have the same capabilities for server based OO apps as Ruby or Python (yet), but it is still a very competent language nonetheless for small to medium sized apps.
JavaScript's similarity to Java can also be helpful for readability.
The Moz guy's are still hacking the core of Rhino and are releasing new version regularly.