I just went through this whole song and dance of deciding which toolkit to use. I wanted to use Qt because I perceive it as more established than many alternatives. But the reality is that they do not support many platforms. Sure, the desktop platforms are supported. But in this day and age, everything interesting is happening in the embedded world. So wheres the support for Pocket PC, Palm, and all the smart phones? Sucks, but at least I realized it now, when I've only invested $39 in Qt rather than the full $6K... lol.
I'm sorry, its a new world. Big companies are outsourcing jobs. The workers are left fighting for fewer jobs and are turning to small business ownership as a means of survival. The internet levels the playing field. Its the only domain where a company of 1 can compete with a company of 1 million. You can bet that these companies will do everything in their power, including but not limited to offering free content to entice people to come to their site.
What it WILL end is the reign of businesses which model their business STRICTLY off the profitability of hosting third party advertisements. It came crashing down with the dot-com collapse, and is being mortally wounded by a public that simply doesn't like that paradigm.
Ok, Aaron, I disagreed with you the first time you gave that lame excuse. I've been in the situation that your company has put its developers in. "We're sending your code to QA because we've got a deadline, despite the fact that they are just going to report stuff that you are most certainly aware of, even though it just further slows down the development process."
Aaron; please ask your management to listen to its developers, and other developers that volunteer to assist you with your product for free. We KNOW what we are talking about.
Ok, Aaron, I disagreed with you the first time you gave that lame excuse. I've been in the situation that your company has put its developers in. "We're sending your code to QA because we've got a deadline, despite the fact that they are just going to report stuff that you are most certainly aware of."
Aaron; please ask your management to listen to its developers, and other developers that volunteer to assist you with your product for free. We KNOW what we are talking about.
Ya know... You are right. The problem is that young developers tend to want to treat everything as a wrench. But hopefully, sometime in the career of those developers, they will realize that bicycles are for the sidewalk and cars are for the road. A car has a high cost, but can go fast. If you try to use it on a sidewalk, its likely to get stuck since its too wide. Vice versa, a bicycle would not be good on the expressway because its not fast enough
It sounds like the operations manager wanted a bicycle and the IT department responded with, "We can't afford to buy you a car right now." This is a problme all too common in big corporations. I saw this all the time when I worked at a large German corporation that rhymes with MindBlurPieSlur.
Nothing wrong with being closed source. The open source model doesn't fit every business situation. To be honest, I think that the open-source concept has turned being a programmer into being a "superstar".. What I mean is that there are lots of good applications that people could make a living at if they maintained closed source. Those same applications would not bring in enough service revenue to allow the developer a decent living. The few products that DO bring in this much money are the "superstars"... There are very few superstars. Certainly there are too few of them for me to personally consider giving away my source code.
"The results of the 2005 Qt Customer Survey are in! 96% of Qt customers said that they would recommend Qt to others."
Maybe its that expensive because its really that good!
Anyhow, there are lots of low cost development tools for developing the standard internal corporate software. People that buy Qt are making commercial apps. If $3000 is going to break you, then perhaps you need to reconsider your business strategy.
...Because of this, we have decided to make REALbasic 2005 for Linux Standard Edition for free.
Haha. RealSoftware really is on to something. I wish I could make software for free. I could sell it for alot less without that development cost.
Haha. I was one of the beta testers. I don't send bug reports on obvious things like "Can't open new project", etc. Every few months I would download a new beta and play with it. I would quickly come to the conclusion that 1) The bugs are too obvious to report on, and 2) This thing is not yet at a point where it would be a productive environment.
Well, to make a long story short, I decided it was not at a point of being productive a few weeks before they shipped the "final" version. I highly doubt they could cover enough ground to make it a useable product. The day after their release, they kicked me out of the beta program for "lack of participation." I explained to them that its very counter-productive to have millions of bug reports on obvious and fundamental problems. The code has to first reach a certain level of maturity before it can properly enter a beta status. IMO it had not yet reached that point. They would not hear of it. All I can figure is that they wanted me to report bugs like; "There is no code written yet for the window that is supposed to show me what events a component responds to."
It always amazes me that I can be so interested in something, yet learn about a new product that looks so cool.
This product shows alot of promise. But to me it completely misses the point because it is not cross platform. Why would anybody whom is interested being a software developer choose a development tool that was only available for one OS?
The other problem is that I hate when applications have a million little unmanaged windows floating around. Try using this product on a 12.1 inch laptop LCD and you'll quickly realize that docking windows have a purpose.
...REALbasic 2005 is a modern, object-oriented language and environment, so C++ developers feel right at home. Familiar concepts such as polymorphism, object references and exception handling are supported with a clean, modern syntax.
Well, almost. I've done my share of RB projects. Unless they have made sweeping changes to the API, the graphical components most certainly are not object oriented.
You can't, for instance, instantiate a new Window. Very frustrating when languages go 90%, but then always seem to find other things to do rather than fixing the last little bit to make it work properly.
As much as I appreciate your chastisement, I don't believe that I ever once called myself a kid, or a miser. Proper differentiation between users(xxx million) of software and developers(x thousand) of software may help in your analysis of my comments.
Linux isn't going away because there is always going to be kids and misers in the world. But when I got busy with my job and with life, I had to simplify. That extra $100 to remove extra hassle from my life was well worth it.
Recently I went through the process of re-deciding what to buy. Linux is still the same old story. The only company that seems to champion Linux is IBM. That doesn't give me warm fuzzies. I almost bought a think pad until I realized that the T43 is not on the list of laptops that support Linux. The rest of them are only offered with low resolution LCDs. I spent quite a bit of time looking for a laptop that would run Linux flawlessly. But they ALL seem to have one problem or another. This one doesn't hibernate. That one has trouble with the video card. These don't have the right sound drivers. I bought a Dell about 5 years back on the premise that it would run Linux well. Well, somebody made a minor "tweak" between revs that ended my dream.
I got excited for a moment when I read the above article because it mentioned that HP has a new laptop which officially supports Linux. But alas, it was all smoke and mirrors. I looked at all the laptops offered by HP, but none are offered with Linux. So I typed "Ubuntu" in the search window and got no hits. Where is this corporate embrace everybody in the Linux community is always talking about? I don't see it. I see some also-ran's selling Linux on their 7.5lb brick-books, but nothing that tells me corporates are beginning to take Linux serious.
I think most technology companies see Linux as a hassle that they secretly wish would go away. Think I'm off base? Most people are perfectly satisfied with Windows. Companies consist of owners and employee. Since owners and employees are people, it stands to reason that most owners and employees are satisfied with Windows. If they are satisfied with Windows, that means they think Linux is a waste of time. If they think that, then they view anything they have to do to support it as additional work. Nobody likes additional work.
No, most corporations are just playing the game. They say, "Yeah yeah yeah, we like Linux." But when it comes time to put their money where there mouth is, the Linux support never seems to materialize, or its short lived if it does.
Meanwhile, I plunk down an extra few hundred and I get the best customer satisfaction in the industry, noticeably better service (Dell versus Apple), more durrable and reliable hardware (Go to CompUSA and do the flex test on the laptops. The PC laptops feel like they are made out of sponge. The motherboard is mounted to the casing. How durrable can they be? On the Apple side; even the iBooks are rigid as heck. Not only are they made of a thicker plastic, but they are LEXAN; Pretty much indestructable.), and an operating system that just works.
I run my Unix apps. I run my digital multitrack recording apps. I've got XCode and a whole host of other development IDEs to choose from. I've got Microsoft Office, in case I need to read one of the devil's files. In fact I've never found a problem domain in which there wasn't EXCELLENT software available for the Mac. And as a bonus, I don't have to buy the hardware to find out whether or not hibernate will work on it. If I buy a Mac, I know it will.
I don't understand this logic at all. The browser must be extended to meet the needs of its users. One of my biggest gripes is that Javascript was abandoned before it became a "complete" language. Now its forever stuck in limbo because corporations are too caught up in bureaucracy to download and utilize a FREE product?
The stupidity warp around Microsoft never ceases to amaze me...
From what I understand, AMD used both the design strategies and the engineers from Cyrix when they bought them out. So I suppose you could say that the latest offerings by AMD is just another Cyrix design whomping and Intel design.
I hate how Apple does this. I wasn't aware they were attempting to antiquate the G4 already. I know I had the same problem with the G3 (Trying to use Sound Track). Stupid to artificially antiquate a chipset that a company (Freestyle) is still pouring money into, trying to make competitive. Perhaps one of the other users was correct, and they will designate the dual-cores as a G5 processors, just to please their own software requirements. I can't imagine that a Powerbook bought in Q2 2005 would not run software that was released prior to it...
If Freescale continues to improve the speed and heat dissipation of the G4 the way they have been, who cares if its a G4 or G5. G4 is faster at the same clock speed. So whats the difference between a 1.5Ghz G4 and a 1.8Ghz G5? I think it would be much more productive for Applie to differentiate the powerbook line from the ibook line by putting one of those swanky new dual core G4's in it.
Hey, whatd'ya know. The new G4's should be available 2nd quarter.
Cyrix didn't have a problem selling processors as the minority player. Why? Because they had a competitive product. Transmeta failed for one reason and one reason alone: Their processors could not come close to matching the performance Intel and AMDs processors.
I'm sorry. Integration with other MS applications is not integration. If it was, Macromedia would be the king of integration. The 3rd party integration is slipshod and non intuitive. Every 3rd party plugin I've ever used for Word tends to crash (Even $XXXXX packages from Rational) frequently. Cut and paste between applications and Word only works the way one would expect a small percentage of the time. If it is this confusing for the developers at Microsoft to figure out what the end user wants, then they need to provide a more sophisticated set of options, so the end user can tell the application how he wants it to behave.
Not sure why your troll received such high regard, but evil is not the problem with Microsoft Office. The lack of domain-expertise about the way a user interacts with an application is the real problem. Five minutes with Word will reveal this flaw. If, otoh, Word worked as well as Excel, nobody would ever question the value of Office. Heck, even a 1997 copy of AMI PRO works better than the latest versions of Word. Why is that? Because Microsoft only makes a product as good as it has to be to gain dominance. Perhaps Apple's suite will provide incentive to improve their product. That would really be the best of all worlds. Though I will probably reward Apple with my hard earned money, because the corporate philosophy is one of perfectionism. This fits my personality better.
Looking at the likely trajectories, Earth is on the fringe of them. OTOH, the moon's orbit sweeps deep into the possible paths. Anybody care to speculate how much easier it would be to change the orbit of the moon and what would happen if it caused the moon's orbit to decay?
I look at the PC Mods that are "comperable" to a Mac and I have to wonder this question. The Macs I see are, for the most part, fairly tasteful. There have been some that are over the edge, such as the clamshell laptops. But every PC mod I've seen has been total ghetto pimp. How does a clear case with glowing neon lights substitute the practical yet stylish design qualities of a Mac? Also, whats really great about a Mac is the way it works. I've said it many times, I had no intention of switching to a mac until I tried THREE TIMES to purchase software to make DVDs (on two separate PCs, so no it wasn't a hardware problem). I finally was fed up and decided I would take a chance. It was the best $1200 I ever spent!!! This Christmas and last Christmas, the gift to our family was a DVD of the year's highlights. They love it, its easy, and despite working with 4 gigabyte files, the mac is fast and has never yet crashed!!! Its simply amazing.
Slashdot Mirror
I just went through this whole song and dance of deciding which toolkit to use. I wanted to use Qt because I perceive it as more established than many alternatives. But the reality is that they do not support many platforms. Sure, the desktop platforms are supported. But in this day and age, everything interesting is happening in the embedded world. So wheres the support for Pocket PC, Palm, and all the smart phones? Sucks, but at least I realized it now, when I've only invested $39 in Qt rather than the full $6K... lol.
I'm sorry, its a new world. Big companies are outsourcing jobs. The workers are left fighting for fewer jobs and are turning to small business ownership as a means of survival. The internet levels the playing field. Its the only domain where a company of 1 can compete with a company of 1 million. You can bet that these companies will do everything in their power, including but not limited to offering free content to entice people to come to their site.
What it WILL end is the reign of businesses which model their business STRICTLY off the profitability of hosting third party advertisements. It came crashing down with the dot-com collapse, and is being mortally wounded by a public that simply doesn't like that paradigm.
ooops... lets try this again...
Ok, Aaron, I disagreed with you the first time you gave that lame excuse. I've been in the situation that your company has put its developers in. "We're sending your code to QA because we've got a deadline, despite the fact that they are just going to report stuff that you are most certainly aware of, even though it just further slows down the development process."
Aaron; please ask your management to listen to its developers, and other developers that volunteer to assist you with your product for free. We KNOW what we are talking about.
Ok, Aaron, I disagreed with you the first time you gave that lame excuse. I've been in the situation that your company has put its developers in. "We're sending your code to QA because we've got a deadline, despite the fact that they are just going to report stuff that you are most certainly aware of." Aaron; please ask your management to listen to its developers, and other developers that volunteer to assist you with your product for free. We KNOW what we are talking about.
Ya know... You are right. The problem is that young developers tend to want to treat everything as a wrench. But hopefully, sometime in the career of those developers, they will realize that bicycles are for the sidewalk and cars are for the road. A car has a high cost, but can go fast. If you try to use it on a sidewalk, its likely to get stuck since its too wide. Vice versa, a bicycle would not be good on the expressway because its not fast enough
It sounds like the operations manager wanted a bicycle and the IT department responded with, "We can't afford to buy you a car right now." This is a problme all too common in big corporations. I saw this all the time when I worked at a large German corporation that rhymes with MindBlurPieSlur.
Nothing wrong with being closed source. The open source model doesn't fit every business situation. To be honest, I think that the open-source concept has turned being a programmer into being a "superstar".. What I mean is that there are lots of good applications that people could make a living at if they maintained closed source. Those same applications would not bring in enough service revenue to allow the developer a decent living. The few products that DO bring in this much money are the "superstars"... There are very few superstars. Certainly there are too few of them for me to personally consider giving away my source code.
Maybe its that expensive because its really that good!
Anyhow, there are lots of low cost development tools for developing the standard internal corporate software. People that buy Qt are making commercial apps. If $3000 is going to break you, then perhaps you need to reconsider your business strategy.
...Because of this, we have decided to make REALbasic 2005 for Linux Standard Edition for free. Haha. RealSoftware really is on to something. I wish I could make software for free. I could sell it for alot less without that development cost.
Haha. I was one of the beta testers. I don't send bug reports on obvious things like "Can't open new project", etc. Every few months I would download a new beta and play with it. I would quickly come to the conclusion that 1) The bugs are too obvious to report on, and 2) This thing is not yet at a point where it would be a productive environment.
Well, to make a long story short, I decided it was not at a point of being productive a few weeks before they shipped the "final" version. I highly doubt they could cover enough ground to make it a useable product. The day after their release, they kicked me out of the beta program for "lack of participation." I explained to them that its very counter-productive to have millions of bug reports on obvious and fundamental problems. The code has to first reach a certain level of maturity before it can properly enter a beta status. IMO it had not yet reached that point. They would not hear of it. All I can figure is that they wanted me to report bugs like; "There is no code written yet for the window that is supposed to show me what events a component responds to."
It always amazes me that I can be so interested in something, yet learn about a new product that looks so cool.
This product shows alot of promise. But to me it completely misses the point because it is not cross platform. Why would anybody whom is interested being a software developer choose a development tool that was only available for one OS?
The other problem is that I hate when applications have a million little unmanaged windows floating around. Try using this product on a 12.1 inch laptop LCD and you'll quickly realize that docking windows have a purpose.
Well, almost. I've done my share of RB projects. Unless they have made sweeping changes to the API, the graphical components most certainly are not object oriented.
You can't, for instance, instantiate a new Window. Very frustrating when languages go 90%, but then always seem to find other things to do rather than fixing the last little bit to make it work properly.
As much as I appreciate your chastisement, I don't believe that I ever once called myself a kid, or a miser. Proper differentiation between users(xxx million) of software and developers(x thousand) of software may help in your analysis of my comments.
Linux isn't going away because there is always going to be kids and misers in the world. But when I got busy with my job and with life, I had to simplify. That extra $100 to remove extra hassle from my life was well worth it.
Recently I went through the process of re-deciding what to buy. Linux is still the same old story. The only company that seems to champion Linux is IBM. That doesn't give me warm fuzzies. I almost bought a think pad until I realized that the T43 is not on the list of laptops that support Linux. The rest of them are only offered with low resolution LCDs. I spent quite a bit of time looking for a laptop that would run Linux flawlessly. But they ALL seem to have one problem or another. This one doesn't hibernate. That one has trouble with the video card. These don't have the right sound drivers. I bought a Dell about 5 years back on the premise that it would run Linux well. Well, somebody made a minor "tweak" between revs that ended my dream.
I got excited for a moment when I read the above article because it mentioned that HP has a new laptop which officially supports Linux. But alas, it was all smoke and mirrors. I looked at all the laptops offered by HP, but none are offered with Linux. So I typed "Ubuntu" in the search window and got no hits. Where is this corporate embrace everybody in the Linux community is always talking about? I don't see it. I see some also-ran's selling Linux on their 7.5lb brick-books, but nothing that tells me corporates are beginning to take Linux serious.
I think most technology companies see Linux as a hassle that they secretly wish would go away. Think I'm off base? Most people are perfectly satisfied with Windows. Companies consist of owners and employee. Since owners and employees are people, it stands to reason that most owners and employees are satisfied with Windows. If they are satisfied with Windows, that means they think Linux is a waste of time. If they think that, then they view anything they have to do to support it as additional work. Nobody likes additional work.
No, most corporations are just playing the game. They say, "Yeah yeah yeah, we like Linux." But when it comes time to put their money where there mouth is, the Linux support never seems to materialize, or its short lived if it does.
Meanwhile, I plunk down an extra few hundred and I get the best customer satisfaction in the industry, noticeably better service (Dell versus Apple), more durrable and reliable hardware (Go to CompUSA and do the flex test on the laptops. The PC laptops feel like they are made out of sponge. The motherboard is mounted to the casing. How durrable can they be? On the Apple side; even the iBooks are rigid as heck. Not only are they made of a thicker plastic, but they are LEXAN; Pretty much indestructable.), and an operating system that just works.
I run my Unix apps. I run my digital multitrack recording apps. I've got XCode and a whole host of other development IDEs to choose from. I've got Microsoft Office, in case I need to read one of the devil's files. In fact I've never found a problem domain in which there wasn't EXCELLENT software available for the Mac. And as a bonus, I don't have to buy the hardware to find out whether or not hibernate will work on it. If I buy a Mac, I know it will.
I don't understand this logic at all. The browser must be extended to meet the needs of its users. One of my biggest gripes is that Javascript was abandoned before it became a "complete" language. Now its forever stuck in limbo because corporations are too caught up in bureaucracy to download and utilize a FREE product? The stupidity warp around Microsoft never ceases to amaze me ...
From what I understand, AMD used both the design strategies and the engineers from Cyrix when they bought them out. So I suppose you could say that the latest offerings by AMD is just another Cyrix design whomping and Intel design.
Now if Mr. Rose could just get a PC to run OSX, he'd be all set...
Given the way SP2 foobared my XP, I wonder if there is a way to un-register my copy to take advantage of this feature.
I hate how Apple does this. I wasn't aware they were attempting to antiquate the G4 already. I know I had the same problem with the G3 (Trying to use Sound Track). Stupid to artificially antiquate a chipset that a company (Freestyle) is still pouring money into, trying to make competitive. Perhaps one of the other users was correct, and they will designate the dual-cores as a G5 processors, just to please their own software requirements. I can't imagine that a Powerbook bought in Q2 2005 would not run software that was released prior to it...
If Freescale continues to improve the speed and heat dissipation of the G4 the way they have been, who cares if its a G4 or G5. G4 is faster at the same clock speed. So whats the difference between a 1.5Ghz G4 and a 1.8Ghz G5? I think it would be much more productive for Applie to differentiate the powerbook line from the ibook line by putting one of those swanky new dual core G4's in it. Hey, whatd'ya know. The new G4's should be available 2nd quarter.
Cyrix didn't have a problem selling processors as the minority player. Why? Because they had a competitive product. Transmeta failed for one reason and one reason alone: Their processors could not come close to matching the performance Intel and AMDs processors.
I'm sorry. Integration with other MS applications is not integration. If it was, Macromedia would be the king of integration. The 3rd party integration is slipshod and non intuitive. Every 3rd party plugin I've ever used for Word tends to crash (Even $XXXXX packages from Rational) frequently. Cut and paste between applications and Word only works the way one would expect a small percentage of the time. If it is this confusing for the developers at Microsoft to figure out what the end user wants, then they need to provide a more sophisticated set of options, so the end user can tell the application how he wants it to behave.
Not sure why your troll received such high regard, but evil is not the problem with Microsoft Office. The lack of domain-expertise about the way a user interacts with an application is the real problem. Five minutes with Word will reveal this flaw. If, otoh, Word worked as well as Excel, nobody would ever question the value of Office. Heck, even a 1997 copy of AMI PRO works better than the latest versions of Word. Why is that? Because Microsoft only makes a product as good as it has to be to gain dominance. Perhaps Apple's suite will provide incentive to improve their product. That would really be the best of all worlds. Though I will probably reward Apple with my hard earned money, because the corporate philosophy is one of perfectionism. This fits my personality better.
Hit the moon. Decay its orbit. Destroy earth. Seems possible.
Looking at the likely trajectories, Earth is on the fringe of them. OTOH, the moon's orbit sweeps deep into the possible paths. Anybody care to speculate how much easier it would be to change the orbit of the moon and what would happen if it caused the moon's orbit to decay?
Moon ball in the big body of water....
I look at the PC Mods that are "comperable" to a Mac and I have to wonder this question. The Macs I see are, for the most part, fairly tasteful. There have been some that are over the edge, such as the clamshell laptops. But every PC mod I've seen has been total ghetto pimp. How does a clear case with glowing neon lights substitute the practical yet stylish design qualities of a Mac? Also, whats really great about a Mac is the way it works. I've said it many times, I had no intention of switching to a mac until I tried THREE TIMES to purchase software to make DVDs (on two separate PCs, so no it wasn't a hardware problem). I finally was fed up and decided I would take a chance. It was the best $1200 I ever spent!!! This Christmas and last Christmas, the gift to our family was a DVD of the year's highlights. They love it, its easy, and despite working with 4 gigabyte files, the mac is fast and has never yet crashed!!! Its simply amazing.