I really don't get why people refer to Wordpress as a "platform". It's a blogging system for crying out loud. If the app you're building is very close to a blog, yes, it makes sense to customize Wordpress. Even if the core of your system is very CMSish, Wordpress may be a decent choice since its admin interface is quite extensive and ready to go. But don't refer to Wordpress as a "platform" for any other purpose, please.
Out of genuine interest, what makes a well written (emphasis on WELL WRITTEN) PHP app so much harder to maintain than an equally well written *.NET app?
Too bad this isn't about map data, but about geo location data. Google can easily build a database that maps -39.12412, 128.12351 to "Joe's Bar". No licenses involved. In fact, they already have, they're spidering the information right off of websites for $deitys sakes.
Sure, I'm all for asking questions. But I want to see the research somebody has put into the question already. The OP is pretty much just bitching about his home country and then asks a way-too-open-ended question. That sure makes for a good conversation starter, but doesn't show a lot of actual interest on the OPs part. As the GGP states, he could've at least listed a few languages he speaks and/or is interested in learning.
Sorry if I came across a bit too strong, but that's what this site is for, right? Voicing opinions.:o)
If he was serious about this question he wouldn't be asking.
Come on, asking other people what country to move to? Grow a pair, travel to the country that seems most interesting (and acceptable) to you, then figure out the rest. If you try to find a job from your "safe home", possibly even expecting relocation costs and all covered, you'll have to be a serious superstar or have really good connections to find anything decent. If OTOH you can walk into somebody's office anytime for a chat you'll have much better chances. The world doesn't evolve around you after all.
Switching countries can be quite a big deal, more so than you apparently think. Expect to burn through a bit of cash in the beginning until you figure out the local lifestyle and land a steady job. Obviously, the closer the cultures are, the easier the beginning. I made the switch thrice: Once to Ireland, once to Holland, then to Japan. The first two were easy but boring, as I went because of a job. Japan was the hardest obviously, but also the most rewarding. I improved my English tremendously (2nd language) and learnt Japanese (3rd language). After a year of keeping myself afloat doing random stuff in Hokkaido I found the most satisfying job I ever had in Tokyo. I'm also in the programming/IT sector.
You'll never know if a country is acceptable for you until you go there.
I wasted four years of my life in a middle school where the only things that mattered were crap like whether you were against or for foreigners or whether you were gay or not. This social setting suppressed any kind of learning opportunity, and non of the faculty were able to do anything about it.
In two years of French classes I barely learned how to count in French. Today I speak about 3.9 languages (2 native-level, 1 fluent enough, 2 basics), and I'd love to brush up on my French again.
Teaching needs to be a lot more about general attitude, common sense and learning how to learn than the rubbish public schools provide these days.
Math can't be fun? Some people would beg to differ.
Math can only be taught via memorization? Then you're doing it wrong. You only need to memorize the basics of math, e.g. like how addition and subtraction works. The rest is mostly applying this knowledge in more and more complicated constructs, requiring you to THINK, not memorize. You can memorize formulas, or you can learn their inner workings and the relations they express and the formula is self-evident.
Do you memorize that 4 + 4 = 8? Or do you memorize numbers and how "+" works?
If the code hasn't been written yet then there's nothing to understand. Forgive me for wanting some professionalism around here, but try taking an engineering approach to things.
I think it is you who should try some professional engineering. You don't understand your application before there's any code? You don't even have a vague idea of what you want to do? You just start gluing random code together and hope it compiles and does what you want?
You either need to think about this yourself for a few minutes or you have problems that are a lot bigger than the topic at hand.
Which circles back to my original point of trying to make two mediocres equal one good. This may work to some degree, but I'd argue that if a developer can't live up to this simple requirement, a mentor-type relationship or training, training, training may be a better thing to try.
Maybe some people can derive their training from PP, but then they should transcend that stage rather sooner than later and be able to "write a block of code to the specs and bug free" alone.
Either way, PP seems to me to be either the wrong solution for a problem or just a temporary crutch, but not any kind of end-all-be-all solution to everybody.
Your code is clearly too complicated. If you can't glance at it and tell what's going on, it's too complicated.
I disagree. The phase of working out the details is usually a bit messy if you're working on any kind of involved code. Whether you're working out the details on paper or at the keyboard, alone or with somebody else. You need to go over it a few times and shuffle things around as necessary.
That doesn't mean that the resulting code is messy. I'd say what I end up with is usually very minimalist, understandable and to the point. Write it out verbosely, cut redundancy afterwards, condense where possible, optimize where necessary.
Or can you actually write everything straight, from start to finish, without changes, completely optimized? You always have a phase where things are rather in flux. I happen to go through this phase at the keyboard. With a second person I'd go through it verbally or on paper, then implement it in code when we can agree on a good solution. Either way, one person is writing the actual code. I don't see a need for somebody looking over my shoulder during that time.
It's great to bounce ideas off of another experienced developer. It's great to discuss advantages and disadvantages of certain designs over others. But writing a block of code that implements these design decisions without bugs and to the specs/idea should be well within the capabilities of a single programmer.
Any significant chunk of code is highly complex and detailed. It needs to be kept in the head as a whole...
Indeed. Code sometimes simply doesn't make sense until a whole block of it is finished, but then it might be the optimal solution. I often keep notes or hypothetical variable states strewn about the code while I'm developing to help me develop the details from my general idea, often not even as comments, which invalidates any syntax. Once the idea is "out of my head" and has been written down into detailled steps, I go about cleaning the code up and testing it.
I probably couldn't communicate every single piece of code to somebody else in this development phase, because it doesn't make complete sense to me either yet, as I'm still working out the details. Once it's finished I can communicate it perfectly, because I understand the general idea AND the detailled implementation.
I imagine any moderately experienced developer works much the same way and just needs somebody to bounce bigger concepts off of every once in a while. But every itsy bitsy piece of code...? That indeed seems like trying to make two mediocres equal one good.
We had to let one of the nicest guys ever go because the work we needed him to do went way over his head. We tried to find something else for him to do, but there simply wasn't anything that he could pull off with any quality in any realistic amount of time.
Soft skills are all very well and in the end both soft and hard skill sets are necessary, but the know-WTF-you're-talking-about kind comes first.
I think you have the wrong impression of what art is.
Programming is somewhere at the intersection of engineering and art, and engineering itself is an art to begin with. Sure, first and foremost your code needs to work, but it can work and be like a Rube Goldberg machine or it can work and be a piece of logical beauty, i.e. art.
Exactly. I'm using the same three train stations (concrete jungles, seriously) every morning to get to work, and I know the most direct way between entrances, exits and platforms, which train doors will be closest to where I need to go and I can tell the direction of other important places relative to where I am at any time.
Does that mean I have a built-in GPS? No, it just means I've taken the same route often enough to have it frikkin committed to memory. It's not that hard. I actually bet it's harder for most humans than for animals since we tend to distract ourselves with loads of other stuff, whereas animals usually seem to concentrate on what they're doing, even walking.
Astonishing what passes for research these days...
So, can you personally envision a solution to this or are you just ranting, like TFA?
It's a really trivial situation that suddenly becomes pretty complex when mashing these two devices together. For no real benefit. What you need to make this work is a complex solution for a problem of a solution in search of a problem. I.e. it's not worth pursuing. People like His Steveness have enough foresight to see that.
Once AI or something like it becomes feasible enough to always know The Right Thing(TM) to do, I can see an all-in-one device become reality. But at that point the device probably wouldn't even have a touchscreen anymore... No sir, Smartphones just aren't it.
So every time I get a call during a TV session the TV is paused automatically, even if I could just walk out of the room while the Better Half could continue to watch? Sounds even worse...
Unfortunately, this is much less of a technical issue than a business issue. Developers are entrenched in DX development, and Microsoft will try to keep it that way. That's the real problem that needs to be solved.
I don't understand why you feel that someone must give you the right to ask this question? Do you not feel empowered to ask this question yourself, or did you have to ask somebody's permission for you to ask this question. Is it not self-evident that you have the inherent right to ask the question?
Try replacing the word "right" with the word "ability", as in natural, physical ability.
Outside of society, in pure nature (imagine you alone in the woods), this is the only determining factor: your own physical ability to do something. There exist no rights. There also exist no wrongs. I could go around flashing trees all day in the woods, nobody would care. It only starts to become an issue when you introduce other people, because they may be annoyed by my flashing them. This over time evolves into "rights" and "responsibilities".
The real definition of "rights" should be: "Things other people don't mind you doing."
Rights are not inalienable, they are made by societies. More specifically, by the society in which you (choose to) live. They differ from society to society.
We can agree that there should be a number of certain "rights" in every society, because most people will feel very restricted if they're absent. That still doesn't make them inalienable or natural. Naturally desired maybe.
Your natural rights are self-evident, and they exist as much as the number 1 or the number 0 exists.
Sorry, but natural rights don't exist. Natural abilities exist. In nature, there is no concept of right or wrong. The number 1 and 0 don't just exist either. They as well are man-made concepts. If people stop talking about them and forget about them, they for all practical purposes cease to exist.
Unfortunately tasks are almost always associated with some sort of tool. If you want music, you gotta turn on the stereo, your PMP or tune your guitar. When you're hungry you go to the fridge. If you want to drive a nail in the wall, you use a hammer. There's rarely a task that doesn't involve some tool or another.
In this sense, the OS X model works really well. You learn once which tool gets the job done and henceforth only have to choose the right tool.
Windows tried to create a more "task centric" interface ("Play this music", "Upload these files"), but I never got to like it, as the tools Windows chooses to accomplish these tasks usually aren't want I want, and so I go back to choosing my own tools. Bad implementation or bad metaphor?
Slashdot Mirror
I really don't get why people refer to Wordpress as a "platform". It's a blogging system for crying out loud. If the app you're building is very close to a blog, yes, it makes sense to customize Wordpress. Even if the core of your system is very CMSish, Wordpress may be a decent choice since its admin interface is quite extensive and ready to go. But don't refer to Wordpress as a "platform" for any other purpose, please.
Out of genuine interest, what makes a well written (emphasis on WELL WRITTEN) PHP app so much harder to maintain than an equally well written *.NET app?
...as Subjective and Argumentative.
Oh, wrong site.
Too bad this isn't about map data, but about geo location data. Google can easily build a database that maps -39.12412, 128.12351 to "Joe's Bar". No licenses involved. In fact, they already have, they're spidering the information right off of websites for $deitys sakes.
Sure, I'm all for asking questions. But I want to see the research somebody has put into the question already. The OP is pretty much just bitching about his home country and then asks a way-too-open-ended question. That sure makes for a good conversation starter, but doesn't show a lot of actual interest on the OPs part. As the GGP states, he could've at least listed a few languages he speaks and/or is interested in learning.
Sorry if I came across a bit too strong, but that's what this site is for, right? Voicing opinions. :o)
If by "you Americans" you mean me, read my post again. Hint: English 2nd language = not USAian. No, no minority either. :)
If he was serious about this question he wouldn't be asking.
Come on, asking other people what country to move to? Grow a pair, travel to the country that seems most interesting (and acceptable) to you, then figure out the rest. If you try to find a job from your "safe home", possibly even expecting relocation costs and all covered, you'll have to be a serious superstar or have really good connections to find anything decent. If OTOH you can walk into somebody's office anytime for a chat you'll have much better chances. The world doesn't evolve around you after all.
Switching countries can be quite a big deal, more so than you apparently think. Expect to burn through a bit of cash in the beginning until you figure out the local lifestyle and land a steady job. Obviously, the closer the cultures are, the easier the beginning. I made the switch thrice: Once to Ireland, once to Holland, then to Japan. The first two were easy but boring, as I went because of a job. Japan was the hardest obviously, but also the most rewarding. I improved my English tremendously (2nd language) and learnt Japanese (3rd language). After a year of keeping myself afloat doing random stuff in Hokkaido I found the most satisfying job I ever had in Tokyo. I'm also in the programming/IT sector.
You'll never know if a country is acceptable for you until you go there.
Amen.
I wasted four years of my life in a middle school where the only things that mattered were crap like whether you were against or for foreigners or whether you were gay or not. This social setting suppressed any kind of learning opportunity, and non of the faculty were able to do anything about it.
In two years of French classes I barely learned how to count in French. Today I speak about 3.9 languages (2 native-level, 1 fluent enough, 2 basics), and I'd love to brush up on my French again.
Teaching needs to be a lot more about general attitude, common sense and learning how to learn than the rubbish public schools provide these days.
Math can't be fun? Some people would beg to differ.
Math can only be taught via memorization? Then you're doing it wrong. You only need to memorize the basics of math, e.g. like how addition and subtraction works. The rest is mostly applying this knowledge in more and more complicated constructs, requiring you to THINK, not memorize. You can memorize formulas, or you can learn their inner workings and the relations they express and the formula is self-evident.
Do you memorize that 4 + 4 = 8?
Or do you memorize numbers and how "+" works?
Vista default installation ~= 15GB
Obligatory M$ analogy = FAIL
I think it is you who should try some professional engineering. You don't understand your application before there's any code? You don't even have a vague idea of what you want to do? You just start gluing random code together and hope it compiles and does what you want?
You either need to think about this yourself for a few minutes or you have problems that are a lot bigger than the topic at hand.
Which circles back to my original point of trying to make two mediocres equal one good. This may work to some degree, but I'd argue that if a developer can't live up to this simple requirement, a mentor-type relationship or training, training, training may be a better thing to try.
Maybe some people can derive their training from PP, but then they should transcend that stage rather sooner than later and be able to "write a block of code to the specs and bug free" alone.
Either way, PP seems to me to be either the wrong solution for a problem or just a temporary crutch, but not any kind of end-all-be-all solution to everybody.
I disagree. The phase of working out the details is usually a bit messy if you're working on any kind of involved code. Whether you're working out the details on paper or at the keyboard, alone or with somebody else. You need to go over it a few times and shuffle things around as necessary.
That doesn't mean that the resulting code is messy. I'd say what I end up with is usually very minimalist, understandable and to the point. Write it out verbosely, cut redundancy afterwards, condense where possible, optimize where necessary.
Or can you actually write everything straight, from start to finish, without changes, completely optimized?
You always have a phase where things are rather in flux. I happen to go through this phase at the keyboard. With a second person I'd go through it verbally or on paper, then implement it in code when we can agree on a good solution. Either way, one person is writing the actual code. I don't see a need for somebody looking over my shoulder during that time.
It's great to bounce ideas off of another experienced developer. It's great to discuss advantages and disadvantages of certain designs over others. But writing a block of code that implements these design decisions without bugs and to the specs/idea should be well within the capabilities of a single programmer.
Indeed. Code sometimes simply doesn't make sense until a whole block of it is finished, but then it might be the optimal solution. I often keep notes or hypothetical variable states strewn about the code while I'm developing to help me develop the details from my general idea, often not even as comments, which invalidates any syntax. Once the idea is "out of my head" and has been written down into detailled steps, I go about cleaning the code up and testing it.
I probably couldn't communicate every single piece of code to somebody else in this development phase, because it doesn't make complete sense to me either yet, as I'm still working out the details. Once it's finished I can communicate it perfectly, because I understand the general idea AND the detailled implementation.
I imagine any moderately experienced developer works much the same way and just needs somebody to bounce bigger concepts off of every once in a while. But every itsy bitsy piece of code...? That indeed seems like trying to make two mediocres equal one good.
We had to let one of the nicest guys ever go because the work we needed him to do went way over his head. We tried to find something else for him to do, but there simply wasn't anything that he could pull off with any quality in any realistic amount of time.
Soft skills are all very well and in the end both soft and hard skill sets are necessary, but the know-WTF-you're-talking-about kind comes first.
Politicians: Hard at work to put the "I" in ISS...
Moderation system needs +1 Funny & Hitting the Nail on the Head
I think you have the wrong impression of what art is.
Programming is somewhere at the intersection of engineering and art, and engineering itself is an art to begin with. Sure, first and foremost your code needs to work, but it can work and be like a Rube Goldberg machine or it can work and be a piece of logical beauty, i.e. art.
Exactly. I'm using the same three train stations (concrete jungles, seriously) every morning to get to work, and I know the most direct way between entrances, exits and platforms, which train doors will be closest to where I need to go and I can tell the direction of other important places relative to where I am at any time.
Does that mean I have a built-in GPS? No, it just means I've taken the same route often enough to have it frikkin committed to memory. It's not that hard. I actually bet it's harder for most humans than for animals since we tend to distract ourselves with loads of other stuff, whereas animals usually seem to concentrate on what they're doing, even walking.
Astonishing what passes for research these days...
So, can you personally envision a solution to this or are you just ranting, like TFA?
It's a really trivial situation that suddenly becomes pretty complex when mashing these two devices together. For no real benefit. What you need to make this work is a complex solution for a problem of a solution in search of a problem. I.e. it's not worth pursuing. People like His Steveness have enough foresight to see that.
Once AI or something like it becomes feasible enough to always know The Right Thing(TM) to do, I can see an all-in-one device become reality. But at that point the device probably wouldn't even have a touchscreen anymore...
No sir, Smartphones just aren't it.
So every time I get a call during a TV session the TV is paused automatically, even if I could just walk out of the room while the Better Half could continue to watch?
Sounds even worse...
Try muting the TV using your smartphone when you have an incoming call.
'Nuff said.
Oh, and ponies please while you're at it, m'kay?
Unfortunately, this is much less of a technical issue than a business issue. Developers are entrenched in DX development, and Microsoft will try to keep it that way. That's the real problem that needs to be solved.
I don't understand why you feel that someone must give you the right to ask this question? Do you not feel empowered to ask this question yourself, or did you have to ask somebody's permission for you to ask this question. Is it not self-evident that you have the inherent right to ask the question?
Try replacing the word "right" with the word "ability", as in natural, physical ability.
Outside of society, in pure nature (imagine you alone in the woods), this is the only determining factor: your own physical ability to do something. There exist no rights. There also exist no wrongs. I could go around flashing trees all day in the woods, nobody would care. It only starts to become an issue when you introduce other people, because they may be annoyed by my flashing them. This over time evolves into "rights" and "responsibilities".
The real definition of "rights" should be: "Things other people don't mind you doing."
Rights are not inalienable, they are made by societies. More specifically, by the society in which you (choose to) live. They differ from society to society.
We can agree that there should be a number of certain "rights" in every society, because most people will feel very restricted if they're absent. That still doesn't make them inalienable or natural. Naturally desired maybe.
Your natural rights are self-evident, and they exist as much as the number 1 or the number 0 exists.
Sorry, but natural rights don't exist. Natural abilities exist. In nature, there is no concept of right or wrong.
The number 1 and 0 don't just exist either. They as well are man-made concepts. If people stop talking about them and forget about them, they for all practical purposes cease to exist.
Unfortunately tasks are almost always associated with some sort of tool. If you want music, you gotta turn on the stereo, your PMP or tune your guitar. When you're hungry you go to the fridge. If you want to drive a nail in the wall, you use a hammer. There's rarely a task that doesn't involve some tool or another.
In this sense, the OS X model works really well. You learn once which tool gets the job done and henceforth only have to choose the right tool.
Windows tried to create a more "task centric" interface ("Play this music", "Upload these files"), but I never got to like it, as the tools Windows chooses to accomplish these tasks usually aren't want I want, and so I go back to choosing my own tools. Bad implementation or bad metaphor?