As part of my CS education I had a course in DSDM or the Dynamic Systems Development Method. The triangle consisted of money, time, features. Two corners were fixed (usually money and time) and with this triangle we could make the customer see that the feature part can't also be fixed. In comes the MoSCoW treatment, etc, etc.
Well, they could claim to lose money on chordbooks. The official books are often of such better quality that this is a stupid claim. There are a lot of good tabs out there (I should know, I use them often) but usually the "real" book has greater detail, more instrumentation, notes on equipment used, and (rather important) rhythm structures.
What the RIAA's fail to understand is that these tabs are all made by enthousiasts. These are the people that are actually enthousiastic about the music. They like it so much that they want to play it themselves, and share this knowledge with like-minded people. They sit with their guitars and the cd and copy the song down. Is this not love? Are these really the people you want to turn against you?
Have you visited the Ubuntu forums lately? Not to sound fanboi (I am), but there are so many helpful, friendly people there, it's really amazing. Sure, they expect you to at least have a google at your problem yourself, but why is that bad?
Yes, there are people who will say you are stupid. Sometimes, they're even right. But if they aren't, you could just ignore them and listen to the 10 other people who actually provide a helpful answer.
You're right. But who will fix these people's computers? They come home with a shiny new gadget (iPod? new printer? different mouse?) and they want to plug it in and go!... but can't, without the CS degree. This is a serious problem. On one hand, these people need to be in a sandbox where nothing can go wrong, I agree. On the other hand, they need to be able to operate a computer, and installing a new peripheral is part of that task.
I don't get it... I can see your homepage with FF1.5/winXP (shoot me, I'm at work), it has Swedish, Chinese (or so I suppose) and English on it. It works quite fine, because you set the language and the charset. It even works in IE 6!
Is there something I'm not getting? Just interested because we make a lot of Chinese websites at the place I work.
Isn't it strange that we now talk about "computer generated reports" with a lot of disdain, almost assuming error by default, shrugging it off, while the good old human made reports are potentially much more prone to error? Isn't that why we went to automated systems in the first place?
I guess it's still the human factor though, like here, a mistake in the database, and the laziness of trusting computers to be right, all the time. No checks or double checks.
As I understand it, the.NET objects create a bunch of code that is output to the browser. The code for IE6 will instantiate an Activex object, the code for FF, IE7 and others will use the internal XMLHTTP stuff. Take a look at the source of a page that you created with.NET, the source that is output to the browser (View -> Page Source). Note the javascript.
The way it sounds like you use the development tool it will not make any difference at all.
I personally prefer to be closer to the browser and see what the actual code is, but to each his own.
Please note that "difficult ActiveX instantiation" is not that difficult at all and costs at most two lines of javascript. Just so you know.
Patents are for society, not the individual. It's supposed to push progress forward by opening non-obvious ideas for everyone for a limited time. Not MONOPOLIZE obvious ideas for the benefit of one person against the rest of society.
But what if your society is based around the idea that if you have more money than your neighbour, you are more/better/have larger gender defining bodyparts than he does? That if, historically justified, you "beat" society, you are deemed a "winner"?
If you look at the situation in that light, it all makes sense. The problem, if you want to call it that, is more fundamental.
And there is much more to Excel than just the fact that it includes all of VB...
I just spent 2 weeks "programming" an Access 2K3 database, and I can assure you that Office does not include all of VB. That's where the A comes in: VBA. For applications.
Doesn't change anything about the way it's handled in OOo, though... Because it's not.
Re:Everything bad for you is good for you again
on
Drink Decaf and Die
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Very true. Forget the low carb and light and decaf stuff, just don't eat and drink so much. I never ever eat light stuff because I think it doesn't taste as good as regular. I don't get fat though, because I don't eat twenty in-betweens and little snacks and I don't drink fizz. Plus I take my bike to work. It works, really. There is no need for the latest fad. Just eat vegetables. Without sauce.
I was amused to find out that when that lo-carb fad was going on (is it still?) doctors who had patients with kidney troubles upped the carbs first thing, and most of it went away... Haha.
Moderation is the word. Eat in moderation, drink in moderation, even diet in moderation. Just don't live moderately, OK.
Nobody was able to give me rational reasons why they preferred Outlook.
Don't underestimate the power of the common. They're used to it, they have friends and colleagues that use it, it's become a bit like Xerox-ing something. Or Google-ing. Maybe less so, but since everyone's using it, your users want it as well. They don't want to be "stuck" with another (inferior? They don't know!) product. (Yes yes, I know it's great, have been using it for over a year and am never switching back to Outlook.)
Anyway, I believe users should have the freedom to use what they like.
I do agree with you though. This is horrible from a security point of view, because no matter how well this gets protected, there will be failures, human or technical.
I hope that the lawyers aren't making the laws in your country. Montesquieu spinning in grave, time for some serious re-thinking of separation of power.
because businesses will be using.NET to integrate all the new MS tools into complete solutions that are far more powerful.
I agree with your standpoint. It looks like every time MS comes up with something, it gets emulated or copied by OSS software. Better, perhaps, made compatible and open, which is good, but still second place. Too little, too late!
What are the "solutions" you talk about? Every time I see that word it makes me think of Dilbert. Managementspeak. What is a "solution"? Will MS be making these "solutions"? Should we go ahead and make them first and better?
Slashdot Mirror
As part of my CS education I had a course in DSDM or the Dynamic Systems Development Method. The triangle consisted of money, time, features. Two corners were fixed (usually money and time) and with this triangle we could make the customer see that the feature part can't also be fixed. In comes the MoSCoW treatment, etc, etc.
Well, they could claim to lose money on chordbooks. The official books are often of such better quality that this is a stupid claim. There are a lot of good tabs out there (I should know, I use them often) but usually the "real" book has greater detail, more instrumentation, notes on equipment used, and (rather important) rhythm structures.
What the RIAA's fail to understand is that these tabs are all made by enthousiasts. These are the people that are actually enthousiastic about the music. They like it so much that they want to play it themselves, and share this knowledge with like-minded people. They sit with their guitars and the cd and copy the song down. Is this not love? Are these really the people you want to turn against you?
Have you visited the Ubuntu forums lately? Not to sound fanboi (I am), but there are so many helpful, friendly people there, it's really amazing. Sure, they expect you to at least have a google at your problem yourself, but why is that bad?
Yes, there are people who will say you are stupid. Sometimes, they're even right. But if they aren't, you could just ignore them and listen to the 10 other people who actually provide a helpful answer.
> Speech will still be protected if it is truly whistleblowing, and not just bitching
Sure, but who decides what's bitching and what's 'true' whistleblowing?
People naked underneath their clothes! Society stamped 18+! ESRB vanishes in puff of logic! USA celebrates!
You're right. But who will fix these people's computers? They come home with a shiny new gadget (iPod? new printer? different mouse?) and they want to plug it in and go! ... but can't, without the CS degree. This is a serious problem. On one hand, these people need to be in a sandbox where nothing can go wrong, I agree. On the other hand, they need to be able to operate a computer, and installing a new peripheral is part of that task.
I don't get it... I can see your homepage with FF1.5/winXP (shoot me, I'm at work), it has Swedish, Chinese (or so I suppose) and English on it. It works quite fine, because you set the language and the charset. It even works in IE 6!
Is there something I'm not getting?
Just interested because we make a lot of Chinese websites at the place I work.
I guess we're just the exception to the rule, then... Now where did that HL2 dvd go?
Google Search Appliance.
...name me one Google BETA product... and the search appliance isn't beta.
Not the regular search, the in-house server thing. Very professional. Very Google.
Although I guess you said:
Isn't it strange that we now talk about "computer generated reports" with a lot of disdain, almost assuming error by default, shrugging it off, while the good old human made reports are potentially much more prone to error? Isn't that why we went to automated systems in the first place?
I guess it's still the human factor though, like here, a mistake in the database, and the laziness of trusting computers to be right, all the time. No checks or double checks.
Are you familiar with a certain fellow by the name of Godwin? His law is knocking at your door at the moment.
Bye!
As I understand it, the .NET objects create a bunch of code that is output to the browser. The code for IE6 will instantiate an Activex object, the code for FF, IE7 and others will use the internal XMLHTTP stuff. Take a look at the source of a page that you created with .NET, the source that is output to the browser (View -> Page Source). Note the javascript.
The way it sounds like you use the development tool it will not make any difference at all.
I personally prefer to be closer to the browser and see what the actual code is, but to each his own.
Please note that "difficult ActiveX instantiation" is not that difficult at all and costs at most two lines of javascript. Just so you know.
Ghost has saved my life so often that I seriously love that tool. Apart from that, you're right.
I just found out that Sygate has been acquired by Symantec and they discontinued the free for home use firewall.... Bummed!
Symantec has never even made anything, they just buy the competition.
This will save my wrists!
... not if it displays porn, though.
(Sorry, I couldn't resist!)
Yeah, sorry 'bout that:
Alleged Cops Allegedly Arrest Alleged Man for Allegedly Smoking Alleged Crack (Allegedly)(Don't sue us!)(Look! A squirrel!)
Patents are for society, not the individual. It's supposed to push progress forward by opening non-obvious ideas for everyone for a limited time. Not MONOPOLIZE obvious ideas for the benefit of one person against the rest of society.
But what if your society is based around the idea that if you have more money than your neighbour, you are more/better/have larger gender defining bodyparts than he does? That if, historically justified, you "beat" society, you are deemed a "winner"?
If you look at the situation in that light, it all makes sense. The problem, if you want to call it that, is more fundamental.
I think you meant to say the word "COMMUNIST!" instead.
And there is much more to Excel than just the fact that it includes all of VB...
I just spent 2 weeks "programming" an Access 2K3 database, and I can assure you that Office does not include all of VB. That's where the A comes in: VBA. For applications.
Doesn't change anything about the way it's handled in OOo, though... Because it's not.
Very true. Forget the low carb and light and decaf stuff, just don't eat and drink so much. I never ever eat light stuff because I think it doesn't taste as good as regular. I don't get fat though, because I don't eat twenty in-betweens and little snacks and I don't drink fizz. Plus I take my bike to work. It works, really. There is no need for the latest fad. Just eat vegetables. Without sauce.
I was amused to find out that when that lo-carb fad was going on (is it still?) doctors who had patients with kidney troubles upped the carbs first thing, and most of it went away... Haha.
Moderation is the word. Eat in moderation, drink in moderation, even diet in moderation. Just don't live moderately, OK.
Nobody was able to give me rational reasons why they preferred Outlook.
Don't underestimate the power of the common. They're used to it, they have friends and colleagues that use it, it's become a bit like Xerox-ing something. Or Google-ing. Maybe less so, but since everyone's using it, your users want it as well. They don't want to be "stuck" with another (inferior? They don't know!) product. (Yes yes, I know it's great, have been using it for over a year and am never switching back to Outlook.)
Anyway, I believe users should have the freedom to use what they like.
Oh, if only admins could all be like that!
Doesn't that make it all the more painful for them?
Second post and already Godwin's law?
I do agree with you though. This is horrible from a security point of view, because no matter how well this gets protected, there will be failures, human or technical.
And as long as lawyers are making ... the laws
I hope that the lawyers aren't making the laws in your country. Montesquieu spinning in grave, time for some serious re-thinking of separation of power.
Today's motd:
... with liberty and justice for all ... who can afford it.
because businesses will be using .NET to integrate all the new MS tools into complete solutions that are far more powerful.
I agree with your standpoint. It looks like every time MS comes up with something, it gets emulated or copied by OSS software. Better, perhaps, made compatible and open, which is good, but still second place. Too little, too late!
What are the "solutions" you talk about? Every time I see that word it makes me think of Dilbert. Managementspeak. What is a "solution"? Will MS be making these "solutions"? Should we go ahead and make them first and better?