To follow along, lets make shareholders and CEO's personally liable for the actions of the companies they run. That would promote better corporate citizenship. oh, wait...
I know many people will say that comparing bridges and software doesn't make sense. But, let me offer this. If people want the same reliability from software they get from a bridge, then maybe they should be prepared for the same expense.
The average bridge runs many millions (if not billions) of dollars and can take 10 years or more (inception to completion) to build. Also, people will die in the construction process. And, you'll still get no guarantee of success (Tacoma Narrows anyone?). Then, bridges are usually payed for with tax money, and almost always run over time and financial budgets. (The Tacoma Narrows was conceived in 1928, construction wasn't completed until 1940, it fell down shortly after.)
I don't know about anyone else but, to me, this seems like a big price to pay to surf the web for pron without getting a virus or a browser crash.
You could do like every resume I see and lie. Just say all those admin jobs were really programming jobs. I think the guy I recently interviewed changed his janitorial experience into programming experience on his resume.
"Assume you are a contractor and all code is to be passed off to the internal development team afterwards"
You are doomed no matter what you do in this situation. NIH syndrome take over and you'll get blamed for everything anyway. When there is a problem the in house people will tell their PHB that whatever you did caused the problem. The PHB won't understand anything anyway.
"if you didn't trust your compiler (or working toward multiple architectures) you could always use some compiler directives and some embedded asm"
You could also just compile the code, and dis-assemble the resulting object code to *know* what the compiler is generating. But, I guess its more fun to use imagination and conjecture to create points to debate.:-)
I would hope that she maybe went to the library and studied other peoples architectural experience. I hope she chose her profession because she will love doing it. If none of these are true then maybe you should question her commitment if you were hiring her. However, that doesn't mean you should disqualify her, maybe she has grown to love it. Truth is, I am not qualified to interview someone for an architectural position. I am qualified to interview someone for a developer position.
Programming is different in that the resources required to get started are small. Its expensive to build a building, its cheap to run a compiler. There are literally thousands of *free* online tutorials to teach almost every programming language invented. Claiming windows doesn't come with any kind of dev environment is bogus. Windows may suck for dev but, its not completely barren. Lets see there is: debug - many a dev started learning assembly with debug QBasic - many a wannabe started with this DOS shell and bat interpreter - weak version of shell scripting but, completely functional windows scripting host - combined with notepad means you are writing applications (with of w/o a gui) in JScript/VBScript Internet Explorer - combined with notepad can have you writing JScript/VBScript in seconds
While none of these is a first class dev environment, they are all sufficient to get started programming with no money and a borrowed computer. If an interest develops, then a *real* environment can be downloaded. Then other things can be downloaded (for free). You mentioned Perl and C. Great examples. There are many others. An OS oriented toward developers could as well specifically BSD or Linux. Even the MACs came with AppleScript plus in browser scripting. Now that the Mac is a real OS it has even better dev tools.
My point was based on general observation of interviewees that I've had in front of me. To be honest, I don't even look at resumes anymore, 90% of the resumes I've seen are 90% lies. I just give candidates a simple programming problem and sit next to them while they solve it. I want to see the thought process (if there is one) used to solve the problem. When I first meet a candidate, I am unbiased by their "experience" or education. I really only care about one thing, "can they do the job".
If their first programming experience is in college, then this is a big sign to question why they are chosing this profession. The ones who chose to code because they love it, generally will have taught themselves to program long before college. Generally, these people tend to be good programmers.
One thing the parent was pointing out, many people with years of 'experience' (impressive resumes) are still missing the basics. I used to give interviewees a simple string parsing question. I've had MIT grads with years of 'experience' in every acronym and buzz word not even know how to compile their code. Of course, I am sure there are some prople who learn to code in college, and never do it in their spare time who become good programmers. I've just never met one. If the schools get better at teaching the subject, maybe I will one day.
I charge $100/hr to consult. Do you realize how much its gonna cost a client to build a PC, install WinDoze, MS Office, and a bunch of other crap they won't need. Hell, we're talking few hundred bucks labor and couple grand in software.
This isn't about saving money, its about making it.
Sun is introducing shared memory in the new VM that should alleviate this somewhat. The idea is that the majority of the "fatness" comes from the libaries. If you only have to load the core libraries once, and each VM can use them then additional VMs won't add so much overhead. If this works, I'm wondering, will we get side-effects from the over-abuse of static member variables.
A *good* C++ programmer will probably write code that outperforms the equivalent in Java. A *good* C+ programmer will remember to deallocate all of his objects to prevent memory leaks. A *good* C++ programmer will copy his strings correctly to prevent buffer overflow exploits.
If you have been involved in developmnent for any reasonable amount of time or worked on projects of reasonable size, you know that *good* programmers are hard to come by. When you add the real world to the picture you find that simple things like garbage collection and a virtual machine can make a mediocre java programmer outperform a mediocre C++ programmer.
If schools actually learned to produce good programmers, and HR departments learned how to identify them, and job interviews verified them, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
This is a funny statement because there is no specific target to go after. You can't sue Linux and Linux can't sue you. You might be able to attack a ditributor/packager but, there's a thousand more ready to take their place.
The biggest problem MS faces with Linux is they don't know how to react to it. They beat a lot of companies buy offering up competing products for free. Now they are trying to compete in an arena where everything is free and they have no idea what to do. If Linux were a business to compete against, they'd be screaming "its using an anti-competitive practice". Its not and they are lost.
Invent and write story in blog that the company everybody loves is going to destroy the company everybody loves to hate. People believe it because they want to.
Buy stock in the company everybody loves to hate at a discount.
Wait 3 days for everybody to realize its just lies.
I'm having a hard time *listening* to that xml file.
Here's the problem with the analogy. I can save an MS Word doc as plain text. The plain text version of a word doc can be read. The HTML version even if ugly and non-standard can still be *read* in non-IE browsers. A song list is just a bunch of text. I can't listen too it.
Now export a MS Office document to HTML
Since when is a word processor an HTML editor? Try the same thing with Abi Word, Open Office, Word Perfect. The results are about the same.
Regarding HTML: see above. Regarding RTF: Sure, because MS writes that standard
Actually, not. The W3C maintains the standard for HTML. While MS did invent RTF, its an open format and the default format for the default text editor on the Mac, TextEdit.
MPEG4?
Thats just a case of MS being a bunch of cry-babies and trying (and failing) to exploit their position in the market. Everybody's been telling them they are a monopoly, guess they started to believe it. (to really clarify, remember QT is just a wrapper for the actual MPEG4 encoded data, much like Real's RM or MS's AVI)
And Apple isn't trying to eliminate competition by making products that don't play well with others?
Netscape and Word Perfect still run on Windows. IE will display web pages served by the Netscape Enterprise server. The Netscape browser will display web pages served by IIS. MS Word is 'still' more expensive than Word Perfect.
Apple currently ships with the Safari browser, most Linux distros ship with Konqueror and Mozilla, isn't this the same as Windows shipping with IE? In no case are you forced to use the browser that ships with the OS. In all cases you can *choose* to use something else.
I'm no MS fan but, this argument has always seemed like a lot of BS. MS didn't design Windows to prevent you from running alternative web browsers or office products. Win95/98/NT/2K/XP will run Open Office, Star Office, Corel, Lotus, Opera, Netscape, Mozilla, RealPlayer, Quicktime, etc... just fine. Seems if they are trying to "eliminate competition" they are doing a pretty crappy job of it.
Lets face it, MS is the McDonalds of Software. McDonalds makes the worst hamburgers of any fast food chain. Yet, they sell more than anyone one else. Why? Superior marketing.
Why is it BAD to have vertically aligned Windows/IE/Office and GOOD when its iPod/iTunes?
Vendor lock-in is vendor lock-in.
I can't put Yahoo music on an iPod and I can't put iTunes music on my RCA MP3 player. I can look at anybody's HTML in IE, and I can look at RTF generated from Office in other office apps.
Another reason that Apple won't dominate business is they are practicably impossible to use without a mouse (out of the box anyway). Most businesses are in constant fear of lawsuits over section 508. Windows, KDE, and Gnome are windowing environments that take into account that a user may need alternative forms of input and control. Hell, if Apple made their environment more usable, I might even use it (except for the menu bar thing at the top, that drives me bonkers).
Could you define what you mean by "good search engine"?
To me its one that helps me find what I'm looking for quickly. For me, (right now anyway) google fits the bill. Of course, others have had good searches and destroed them with paid placements.
I should have posted an example instead of simply running off my mouth (fingers?).
Open a text editor. Enter the following, and save it in a file called gmail.hta (on your windows machine) You can then double click it. Note, you can also specify your own icons.
Hmmm, sounds like you want what MS calls an HTA (html application). Basically, an HTML file with an HTA extension. You could drop it on your desktop, and it could connect to the "live" web application, and give you pretty Icons, customized menubar, yada yada yada.
Even if developing so called thick client apps for multiple platforms, you still have to deal with this. Sure, you can contain the core of your business logic in some well written ANSI C++ but, generally, the UI code will be much bigger than the rest of the app, and you still have to code to the different libraries. Testing is still an arduous task. Making the apps 508 compliant can still be difficult. What AJAX really provides is simplified deployment (and marketing foofoo). Where it really hurts is dev and debugging.
For an example of a *slow* applet. Try Runescape. runescape.com 3D MUD in an applet. I'd like to see that one tried with AJAX.
If starting the VM brings down even a slow machine, there is something wrong with the machine. The javascript interpeter in your web browser is just a different kind of virtual machine.
Speed of an Applet or an AJAX app (or any app) is much more dependent on the people who wrote the app than the platform its running on.
As for GUIs, again, its up to the developer. No one forces them to use AWT/Swing. You can use them or write your own. Hmmm, just like the proposed AJAX apps.
Not everywhere, well, thats a given.
How about some reasons to use an applet. Mature development environments exist. They can be run through a debugger. Apps can be built in a fraction of the time and be more robust. Since you brought up IE6, avoid the IE6 memory leak in its javascript interpreter.
OTOH, all of these arguments could be made for using Flash also.
Why must an OS be all things to all people? Maybe your mother can have a different OS than you. If you are an advanced user and she is a novice, why should you use the same OS? This is like a Mac fanatic defending a one-button mouse because its easier for a novice. About 30 minutes of use moves a person above the state of pure novice. Just imagine a world where people make their computer revolve around their own needs instead of sucumbing to it. A diversity of OS's means that any attacks are limited in scope. Everyone is better off. Lets face it, windows is the best OS for some people, linux is the best for others, mac is the best for others, bsd is the best for others..... Why should we choose an OS based on what Mom or Grandma needs? Get your OS for what YOU need. Mom and Grandma are smarter than you think, and can decide what makes their lives easier.
OT: regarding the printer. when I bought a new printer for my linux box, I just plugged it in and the printer setup wizard started immediately. I was printing a test page in 30 seconds. The same printer on Windows XP took 5 minutes to setup and required a reboot
Another benefit of a configurable kernel is that there are so many variations. The variety makes it much harder to write a worm that is effective againt a significant percentage of Linux boxes. Worm writers know that with Windows they can make alot of assumptions about what is where when writing shell code. An automated attack against a RedHat box will usually fail miserably against a Slackware box, even if they have the same packages and security configuration (which they probably won't). When you consider the huge variety of distros and wacky hardware that people run Linux on, it no surprise that most successful attacks are 'manual'.
If you think about it, we have an OS that if someone wants to break into your boX, they WILL have to do it personally, as opposed to releasing a worm that attacks 1000's of machines at a time. Seems to me you're less likely to get compromised in the first category. If someone *really* wants to get access, THEY WILL (regardless of OS), just don't make it easy.
Slashdot Mirror
To follow along, lets make shareholders and CEO's personally liable for the actions of the companies they run. That would promote better corporate citizenship.
oh, wait...
Let me support your argument.
I know many people will say that comparing bridges and software doesn't make sense. But, let me offer this. If people want the same reliability from software they get from a bridge, then maybe they should be prepared for the same expense.
The average bridge runs many millions (if not billions) of dollars and can take 10 years or more (inception to completion) to build. Also, people will die in the construction process. And, you'll still get no guarantee of success (Tacoma Narrows anyone?). Then, bridges are usually payed for with tax money, and almost always run over time and financial budgets. (The Tacoma Narrows was conceived in 1928, construction wasn't completed until 1940, it fell down shortly after.)
I don't know about anyone else but, to me, this seems like a big price to pay to surf the web for pron without getting a virus or a browser crash.
You could do like every resume I see and lie. Just say all those admin jobs were really programming jobs.
I think the guy I recently interviewed changed his janitorial experience into programming experience on his resume.
"Assume you are a contractor and all code is to be passed off to the internal development team afterwards"
You are doomed no matter what you do in this situation. NIH syndrome take over and you'll get blamed for everything anyway. When there is a problem the in house people will tell their PHB that whatever you did caused the problem. The PHB won't understand anything anyway.
"if you didn't trust your compiler (or working toward multiple architectures) you could always use some compiler directives and some embedded asm"
:-)
You could also just compile the code, and dis-assemble the resulting object code to *know* what the compiler is generating. But, I guess its more fun to use imagination and conjecture to create points to debate.
I would hope that she maybe went to the library and studied other peoples architectural experience. I hope she chose her profession because she will love doing it. If none of these are true then maybe you should question her commitment if you were hiring her. However, that doesn't mean you should disqualify her, maybe she has grown to love it. Truth is, I am not qualified to interview someone for an architectural position. I am qualified to interview someone for a developer position.
Programming is different in that the resources required to get started are small. Its expensive to build a building, its cheap to run a compiler. There are literally thousands of *free* online tutorials to teach almost every programming language invented.
Claiming windows doesn't come with any kind of dev environment is bogus. Windows may suck for dev but, its not completely barren.
Lets see there is:
debug - many a dev started learning assembly with debug
QBasic - many a wannabe started with this
DOS shell and bat interpreter - weak version of shell scripting but, completely functional
windows scripting host - combined with notepad means you are writing applications (with of w/o a gui) in JScript/VBScript
Internet Explorer - combined with notepad can have you writing JScript/VBScript in seconds
While none of these is a first class dev environment, they are all sufficient to get started programming with no money and a borrowed computer. If an interest develops, then a *real* environment can be downloaded. Then other things can be downloaded (for free). You mentioned Perl and C. Great examples. There are many others. An OS oriented toward developers could as well specifically BSD or Linux. Even the MACs came with AppleScript plus in browser scripting. Now that the Mac is a real OS it has even better dev tools.
My point was based on general observation of interviewees that I've had in front of me. To be honest, I don't even look at resumes anymore, 90% of the resumes I've seen are 90% lies. I just give candidates a simple programming problem and sit next to them while they solve it. I want to see the thought process (if there is one) used to solve the problem. When I first meet a candidate, I am unbiased by their "experience" or education. I really only care about one thing, "can they do the job".
If their first programming experience is in college, then this is a big sign to question why they are chosing this profession.
The ones who chose to code because they love it, generally will have taught themselves to program long before college. Generally, these people tend to be good programmers.
One thing the parent was pointing out, many people with years of 'experience' (impressive resumes) are still missing the basics. I used to give interviewees a simple string parsing question. I've had MIT grads with years of 'experience' in every acronym and buzz word not even know how to compile their code.
Of course, I am sure there are some prople who learn to code in college, and never do it in their spare time who become good programmers. I've just never met one. If the schools get better at teaching the subject, maybe I will one day.
I charge $100/hr to consult.
Do you realize how much its gonna cost a client to build a PC, install WinDoze, MS Office, and a bunch of other crap they won't need.
Hell, we're talking few hundred bucks labor and couple grand in software.
This isn't about saving money, its about making it.
Sun is introducing shared memory in the new VM that should alleviate this somewhat.
The idea is that the majority of the "fatness" comes from the libaries. If you only have to load the core libraries once, and each VM can use them then additional VMs won't add so much overhead.
If this works, I'm wondering, will we get side-effects from the over-abuse of static member variables.
A *good* C++ programmer will probably write code that outperforms the equivalent in Java. A *good* C+ programmer will remember to deallocate all of his objects to prevent memory leaks. A *good* C++ programmer will copy his strings correctly to prevent buffer overflow exploits.
If you have been involved in developmnent for any reasonable amount of time or worked on projects of reasonable size, you know that *good* programmers are hard to come by. When you add the real world to the picture you find that simple things like garbage collection and a virtual machine can make a mediocre java programmer outperform a mediocre C++ programmer.
If schools actually learned to produce good programmers, and HR departments learned how to identify them, and job interviews verified them, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Linux is their sworn enemy
This is a funny statement because there is no specific target to go after. You can't sue Linux and Linux can't sue you. You might be able to attack a ditributor/packager but, there's a thousand more ready to take their place.
The biggest problem MS faces with Linux is they don't know how to react to it. They beat a lot of companies buy offering up competing products for free. Now they are trying to compete in an arena where everything is free and they have no idea what to do. If Linux were a business to compete against, they'd be screaming "its using an anti-competitive practice". Its not and they are lost.
probably more like:
Invent and write story in blog that the company everybody loves is going to destroy the company everybody loves to hate. People believe it because they want to.
Buy stock in the company everybody loves to hate at a discount.
Wait 3 days for everybody to realize its just lies.
Sell stock for big profit.
News Flash, SEC starts to investigate bloggers.
Export a song list or library in iTunes
I'm having a hard time *listening* to that xml file.
Here's the problem with the analogy. I can save an MS Word doc as plain text. The plain text version of a word doc can be read. The HTML version even if ugly and non-standard can still be *read* in non-IE browsers. A song list is just a bunch of text. I can't listen too it.
Now export a MS Office document to HTML
Since when is a word processor an HTML editor? Try the same thing with Abi Word, Open Office, Word Perfect. The results are about the same.
Regarding HTML: see above. Regarding RTF: Sure, because MS writes that standard
Actually, not. The W3C maintains the standard for HTML. While MS did invent RTF, its an open format and the default format for the default text editor on the Mac, TextEdit.
MPEG4?
Thats just a case of MS being a bunch of cry-babies and trying (and failing) to exploit their position in the market. Everybody's been telling them they are a monopoly, guess they started to believe it. (to really clarify, remember QT is just a wrapper for the actual MPEG4 encoded data, much like Real's RM or MS's AVI)
And Apple isn't trying to eliminate competition by making products that don't play well with others?
Netscape and Word Perfect still run on Windows. IE will display web pages served by the Netscape Enterprise server. The Netscape browser will display web pages served by IIS. MS Word is 'still' more expensive than Word Perfect.
Apple currently ships with the Safari browser, most Linux distros ship with Konqueror and Mozilla, isn't this the same as Windows shipping with IE? In no case are you forced to use the browser that ships with the OS. In all cases you can *choose* to use something else.
I'm no MS fan but, this argument has always seemed like a lot of BS. MS didn't design Windows to prevent you from running alternative web browsers or office products. Win95/98/NT/2K/XP will run Open Office, Star Office, Corel, Lotus, Opera, Netscape, Mozilla, RealPlayer, Quicktime, etc... just fine. Seems if they are trying to "eliminate competition" they are doing a pretty crappy job of it.
Lets face it, MS is the McDonalds of Software. McDonalds makes the worst hamburgers of any fast food chain. Yet, they sell more than anyone one else.
Why?
Superior marketing.
Why is it BAD to have vertically aligned Windows/IE/Office and GOOD when its iPod/iTunes?
Vendor lock-in is vendor lock-in.
I can't put Yahoo music on an iPod and I can't put iTunes music on my RCA MP3 player. I can look at anybody's HTML in IE, and I can look at RTF generated from Office in other office apps.
Is this just a case of: MS, bad; Apple, good.
Another reason that Apple won't dominate business is they are practicably impossible to use without a mouse (out of the box anyway).
Most businesses are in constant fear of lawsuits over section 508. Windows, KDE, and Gnome are windowing environments that take into account that a user may need alternative forms of input and control. Hell, if Apple made their environment more usable, I might even use it (except for the menu bar thing at the top, that drives me bonkers).
Could you define what you mean by "good search engine"?
To me its one that helps me find what I'm looking for quickly. For me, (right now anyway) google fits the bill. Of course, others have had good searches and destroed them with paid placements.
I should have posted an example instead of simply running off my mouth (fingers?).
e rence/objects/hta.asp
Open a text editor.
Enter the following, and save it in a file called gmail.hta (on your windows machine) You can then double click it. Note, you can also specify your own icons.
code:
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Google Mail</TITLE>
<HTA:APPLICATION ID="oGmail"
APPLICATIONNAME="Google Mail"
SINGLEINSTANCE="yes"
SCROLL="no"
>
</HEAD>
<BODY style="padding: 0 0 0 0; margin: 0 0 0 0">
<IFRAME style="height:100%;width:100%;border:none" src="http://gmail.com">
</IFRAME>
</BODY>
</HTML>
Go here for more info
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/hta/ref
Hmmm, sounds like you want what MS calls an HTA (html application). Basically, an HTML file with an HTA extension. You could drop it on your desktop, and it could connect to the "live" web application, and give you pretty Icons, customized menubar, yada yada yada.
Even if developing so called thick client apps for multiple platforms, you still have to deal with this.
Sure, you can contain the core of your business logic in some well written ANSI C++ but, generally, the UI code will be much bigger than the rest of the app, and you still have to code to the different libraries.
Testing is still an arduous task. Making the apps 508 compliant can still be difficult.
What AJAX really provides is simplified deployment (and marketing foofoo). Where it really hurts is dev and debugging.
For an example of a *slow* applet. Try Runescape.
runescape.com
3D MUD in an applet. I'd like to see that one tried with AJAX.
If starting the VM brings down even a slow machine, there is something wrong with the machine. The javascript interpeter in your web browser is just a different kind of virtual machine.
Speed of an Applet or an AJAX app (or any app) is much more dependent on the people who wrote the app than the platform its running on.
As for GUIs, again, its up to the developer. No one forces them to use AWT/Swing. You can use them or write your own. Hmmm, just like the proposed AJAX apps.
Not everywhere, well, thats a given.
How about some reasons to use an applet. Mature development environments exist. They can be run through a debugger. Apps can be built in a fraction of the time and be more robust. Since you brought up IE6, avoid the IE6 memory leak in its javascript interpreter.
OTOH, all of these arguments could be made for using Flash also.
can't see many reasons why that should be true
Try writing some shell code and injecting it and you will see why.
imagine.
its an open source product.
its missing a feature
maybe you'd just like it to do something different
why, you can just whip out the old development tools and add the missing feature. you can make it do things differently.
*YOU* can have it *YOUR WAY*
*YOU* HAVE THE POWER, use it wisely.
YOU do not have to just blindly accept what someone offers. YOU can make your tools work around YOU.
What an amazing concept.
Why must an OS be all things to all people?
Maybe your mother can have a different OS than you. If you are an advanced user and she is a novice, why should you use the same OS?
This is like a Mac fanatic defending a one-button mouse because its easier for a novice. About 30 minutes of use moves a person above the state of pure novice.
Just imagine a world where people make their computer revolve around their own needs instead of sucumbing to it. A diversity of OS's means that any attacks are limited in scope. Everyone is better off.
Lets face it, windows is the best OS for some people, linux is the best for others, mac is the best for others, bsd is the best for others.....
Why should we choose an OS based on what Mom or Grandma needs? Get your OS for what YOU need. Mom and Grandma are smarter than you think, and can decide what makes their lives easier.
OT:
regarding the printer. when I bought a new printer for my linux box, I just plugged it in and the printer setup wizard started immediately. I was printing a test page in 30 seconds. The same printer on Windows XP took 5 minutes to setup and required a reboot
Another benefit of a configurable kernel is that there are so many variations. The variety makes it much harder to write a worm that is effective againt a significant percentage of Linux boxes. Worm writers know that with Windows they can make alot of assumptions about what is where when writing shell code.
An automated attack against a RedHat box will usually fail miserably against a Slackware box, even if they have the same packages and security configuration (which they probably won't). When you consider the huge variety of distros and wacky hardware that people run Linux on, it no surprise that most successful attacks are 'manual'.
If you think about it, we have an OS that if someone wants to break into your boX, they WILL have to do it personally, as opposed to releasing a worm that attacks 1000's of machines at a time.
Seems to me you're less likely to get compromised in the first category. If someone *really* wants to get access, THEY WILL (regardless of OS), just don't make it easy.