Apple isn't going to take on Microsoft. First Apple knows better than to waste their time trying to make an OS that supports every damn accessory; card or plugged in; as that only invites frustration on the consumer level.
They have labored under the misconception that they are a hardware company for years -- and it cost them world domination. If Apple had thought of themselves as a software company back in the early eighties Microsoft wouldn't have stood a chance. Seriously. Gates would still be selling computer languages and maybe an office productivity suite or two. But ninety percent of the world's PC's wouldn't be running Windoze.
I wrote up a little allegory called 'Coffee and Donuts' about this phenomenon a while back. Basically the truth isn't that Gates won by making a better product. We already know that isn't the case. So what was the secret? He won by simply understanding the market better.
And the PC market isn't there because of the hardware, no matter how cool it is.
Ya, I spent six years in the COBOL mines back inthe 80's. And most of what I did was damn boring. But I could do some cool things with REXX in my spare time. What I liked best was the ease of parsing strings with it. Plus it was integreated pretty well into TSO/ISPF, so I could extend the editors and programming environment with it.
I never wrote a production application in REXX. But I wrote plenty of utilities to make my life easier and some of them took on a life of their own. One of them I wrote after my first exposure to Smalltalk-80. I called it BRZR (Browser) and it was a kind of code browser for JCL (Job Control Language) and COBOL.
You started by opening a JCL job in ISPF and you ran BRZR. It then opened a second session and gave you a list of all the COBOL programs and PROCs in the job. You could select any of those and it would open a new session with that PROC or program in an editor. If you opened a program and ran BRZR again it would give you a list of the copybooks and link routines, which you could open. And so on. It was actually quite cool for an environment as primitive as TSO/ISPF.
BRZR and some other utilities I wrote to ease programming ended up trickling out of the shop I worked in and found use in other agencies. I wonder if someone somewhere is still using a descendant of one of them?
You know, I really can't come up with any more insightful reply to that than "No shit." But I will ramble on nonetheless...
You are correct, Cuban is *not* stupid (even if he did decide to buy a basketball team). This is why I read his blog, even when he talks about said basketball team.
And Cuban knows how to play the public perception game with the best of them. The real issue is that technology has shifted the entire economic landscape of the media industry and no-one has managed to find a new footing. Yet. Cuban is one of those who decided to embrace the change with a new media distribution company, and if he can get the majority of people to see things from this particular viewpoint he wins.
MS Anti-Spyware updated its definition files last night. A scan made since then showed no such thing.
Why didn't someone check this out before posting this drivel? Surely there are plenty of valid critisisms of MS! If you want to pick on MS, do it on something where they deserve the hit.
18GB on a 5.5 drive? Now that was livin'! Hell boy! I remember when hard drives were 5GB and came in disk packs the size of a hatbox. Floppies were 8 inches on a side and held 170KB; enough for the OS, your software and all your data files! And we considered ourselves lucky we didn't have to deal with boxes of punchcards anymore. Why, back then. . . . ZZZZZZ . . .
Ah, you missed my point. I don't even have to follow your link as I am fully aware that Lain is a character in an anime titled "Serial Experiments Lain."
Have you seen the series? If so, you may be aware that the central question of the story is identity (thus the original sig referenced above). However the story also revolves around an interesting corolary; does Lain even exist in the real world. Therefore 'what' is she, and 'why' does she exist?
The answers to those questions are provided in the last two episodes; and thus answer the question in the sig above.
(Ghod I'm a geek. Why am I bothering to explain all this?)
Ghod; Joe Straczynski doing Trek? That is like, well, bringing Linus Torvalds in to lead the Windows Longhorn team. It makes so much sense it could never happen.
OTOH Rick Berman can kiss my hairy butt. You could replace him with an baboon and get better results...
The beauty of this approach is that you can create different balls with different functionality and then cluster them in 3D shapes. You also can cool by using fluid or air-flow through the spaces between the balls. Of course you have to use something to create the connections between the balls, but it requires so little material that you can go back to using a pinch of lead in the mix.
Result? All the functionality of the computer on your desk (other than long-term storage) could be put into a 3" cube of bb-sized spheres. And each one could be custom made to your specifications by picking which spheres are included in what configuration.
[SNIP long discussion of why Ruby is so cool] Quote: "Do yourself a favor, learn a little about these other languages and decide for yourself."
Are willing to pay me to learn [insert your favorite language here]? I spent a lot of time learning Python (currently my favorite language) and have never been paid a cent to write a line of it. I would gladly learn another language if it meant a good job would come of it.
I mentioned in another reply on this thread that I live in the real world. And the sad thing is, here in the real world we get paid money to write code in languages other than [insert your favorite language here]. Hell, I even spent six years in the COBOL mines. By my own count I have programmed in upwards of twenty different languages for pay; and every single one of them sucked for one reason or another! I have to put bread on my table and support my family, so I did what I had to do, despite what my heart told me.
Here in the real world we often must do things like that. I envy those who have more choices. But I've only so much mind share and I need to spend it where it will return the most value in terms of dollars per hour, not personal satisfaction.
And if it was about personal satisfaction I would be nattering on at length about this programming language I have spend fifteen years designing and everyone should be using instead of [insert your favorite language here]. Sadly all I have to show for that wasted time is piles of yellow pads full of notes and about five thousand lines of partially working code...
P.S. Get a/. account and post with your real name. If your opinions are as sound as you feel they are, you shouldn't be shy about connecting your identity to them.
I think you missed my point: Code generators have improved so that the cost-of-change has gone down! At one time they were really only good for getting started by spitting out piles of repetitive, uninteresting code; afterwards you might tweak the generated code or have to change it for a bug fix, so you didn't want to regenerate. This is no longer entirely the case.
Check out some of the links here. Especially CodeWorker.
Mind you I am not entirely a fan of code generators myself, having been forced to use bad ones in the past. But they are good fits for certain kinds of problems, they really have improved recently and I was simply trying to answer the original question in the parent article in a meaningful way. I really do think they are going to be hot in the developer space soon. Unfortunately I expect a lot of PHBs are going to jump on the bandwagon and want us to use code generators in spaces where they aren't a good fit. For example, using a code generator in a case where a nice clean library is more suitable.
I'm not arguing that code generators and advanced IDE's are a form of duct tape -- only that they are a form of duct tape we need. Certainly there might be some magic tool out there that oblivates that nescessity; but until it is in general use I won't be using it to get my work done.
In other words, I live and work in the real world. In the real world things are often hacked together with twisted coat hangers, old pizza boxes and duct tape. So, to me, duct tape is a good thing.
You know, I hear that kind of thing all the time about LISP, Ruby and various flavors of declarative languages. But it is important to note that no one uses them for anything important. (OK, not entirely true I will admit -- there are big projects in LISP at least; but it is certainly true in general.) So, until the rest of us stop using 'broken' tools to write the software that actually runs the world, you really don't have a point.
Someone smarter than me said it best: "There are two types of programming languages; the ones that people bitch about and the ones that no one uses." -- Bjarne Stroustrup
I've already seen one post dissing code generators, but I expect to see that general class of software development tool to greatly increase in popularity over the next couple of years...
Why? Well mostly because they are getting better. Many of the newer code generation tools are very flexible and have some ability to preserve changes to the code; making them easier to fit into real development cycles. Also we are already seeing 'just in time' code generation as an optimization tool; that functionality, when combined with runtime environments like the Java Runtime or the CLR, is going to get easier and more powerful.
So, in the end, we may see developers tweaking code generation templates and filling in design forms/creating design diagrams in order to create some classes of software -- business software and game levels would probably benefit greatly from this scenario.
Obviously there are other classes of software development which would see much less benefit...
Usually, people think a computer is like a wash machine. They refuse to learn, they just want to push the button and it should work; if it breaks, call the mech.
Why do you assume that they are wrong in this? A computer is an appliance for most people. Sure, there are many of us that enjoy fooling with them, much as there are people who spend weekends with their heads under the hoods of their cars. But most people just want to use the computer to do something, whether play a game or write an email, and then go do something else. They don't want to screw around with it constantly and, in my opinion, they shouldn't have to.
Personal computers have been out for ~30 years now. Let's compare this to automobiles; so far weve been through the build-it-yourself phase, the early manufactured phase, the introduction of 'luxury' phase, the low-price for the masses phase and are now moving towards the 'appliance' phase. At this point for automobiles it was the mid 1920's and the cranky old jalopies of the past were finally becoming reliable enough that non-enthusiasts could own and operate one. Automobiles were still some years from automatic transmissions and the road system some years from smooth freeways and good signage. But innovations like electric starters and improved distributors meant that you could drive your car without knowing, in detail, how internal combustion worked.
For what its worth, autos were also fifty years away from electronic ignition and the beginnings of pollution control. I think there are analogies there too.
I was at that reading at UW's Kane Hall, and Stephenson's description isn't quite like I remember it...
For one thing it was no stalemate; Gibson definately kicked his ass. Secondly Stephenson didn't even mention the six hours he spent tied to the Fremont Troll while Gibson chain-smoked and burned him with the cigs.
I've met David Ornstein and my impression is that he thinks of FlexWiki as being a colloborative product. (A very wiki-ish attitude.) However I am unsure if he separates what he does on his own time from what he does for Microsoft with anything other than very fuzzy (and rather wide) line.
Note that the 'father' of the wiki, Ward Cunningham, now works for Microsoft as well. What that means for the future of wikis or integration of wiki-like features into other products at MS I have no idea. But, in the absense of any fire, there does seem to be an awful lot of wiki-smoke here.
Some time ago I wrote a link rich/. journal entry about salary differences for star programmers which covers some of the same ground. But I think the core insight of the article above is this:
Ordinary programmers write code to pay the bills. Great hackers think of it as something they do for fun, and which they're delighted to find people will pay them for.
I found it very interesting that I meet every single qualification for being a great hacker in that article -- except one: I am currently contracting for a certain large software company in Redmond...
Does anyone in the Seattle area need a great hacker who would really rather be writing Python than C#?
Slashdot Mirror
My review of Aeon Flux. Spoilers are very limited.
Money quote:
It's showing no peers right now. No activity at all.
Heh...
Ya, I spent six years in the COBOL mines back inthe 80's. And most of what I did was damn boring. But I could do some cool things with REXX in my spare time. What I liked best was the ease of parsing strings with it. Plus it was integreated pretty well into TSO/ISPF, so I could extend the editors and programming environment with it.
I never wrote a production application in REXX. But I wrote plenty of utilities to make my life easier and some of them took on a life of their own. One of them I wrote after my first exposure to Smalltalk-80. I called it BRZR (Browser) and it was a kind of code browser for JCL (Job Control Language) and COBOL.
You started by opening a JCL job in ISPF and you ran BRZR. It then opened a second session and gave you a list of all the COBOL programs and PROCs in the job. You could select any of those and it would open a new session with that PROC or program in an editor. If you opened a program and ran BRZR again it would give you a list of the copybooks and link routines, which you could open. And so on. It was actually quite cool for an environment as primitive as TSO/ISPF.
BRZR and some other utilities I wrote to ease programming ended up trickling out of the shop I worked in and found use in other agencies. I wonder if someone somewhere is still using a descendant of one of them?
You know, I really can't come up with any more insightful reply to that than "No shit." But I will ramble on nonetheless...
You are correct, Cuban is *not* stupid (even if he did decide to buy a basketball team). This is why I read his blog, even when he talks about said basketball team.
And Cuban knows how to play the public perception game with the best of them. The real issue is that technology has shifted the entire economic landscape of the media industry and no-one has managed to find a new footing. Yet. Cuban is one of those who decided to embrace the change with a new media distribution company, and if he can get the majority of people to see things from this particular viewpoint he wins.
MS Anti-Spyware updated its definition files last night. A scan made since then showed no such thing.
Why didn't someone check this out before posting this drivel? Surely there are plenty of valid critisisms of MS! If you want to pick on MS, do it on something where they deserve the hit.
No shit. My first thought was "This is a joke, right?"
My second thought was "Unless they intend to load up every computer in the world with CIA approved spyware that is..."
18GB on a 5.5 drive? Now that was livin'! Hell boy! I remember when hard drives were 5GB and came in disk packs the size of a hatbox. Floppies were 8 inches on a side and held 170KB; enough for the OS, your software and all your data files! And we considered ourselves lucky we didn't have to deal with boxes of punchcards anymore. Why, back then. . . . ZZZZZZ . . .
Ah, you missed my point. I don't even have to follow your link as I am fully aware that Lain is a character in an anime titled "Serial Experiments Lain."
Have you seen the series? If so, you may be aware that the central question of the story is identity (thus the original sig referenced above). However the story also revolves around an interesting corolary; does Lain even exist in the real world. Therefore 'what' is she, and 'why' does she exist?
The answers to those questions are provided in the last two episodes; and thus answer the question in the sig above.
(Ghod I'm a geek. Why am I bothering to explain all this?)
Re your sig... I think a more important question is "What is Lain?"
Ghod; Joe Straczynski doing Trek? That is like, well, bringing Linus Torvalds in to lead the Windows Longhorn team. It makes so much sense it could never happen.
OTOH Rick Berman can kiss my hairy butt. You could replace him with an baboon and get better results...
Ball Semiconductor has an interesting take on creating integrated circuits: Put them on little spheres of silicon!
The beauty of this approach is that you can create different balls with different functionality and then cluster them in 3D shapes. You also can cool by using fluid or air-flow through the spaces between the balls. Of course you have to use something to create the connections between the balls, but it requires so little material that you can go back to using a pinch of lead in the mix.
Result? All the functionality of the computer on your desk (other than long-term storage) could be put into a 3" cube of bb-sized spheres. And each one could be custom made to your specifications by picking which spheres are included in what configuration.
I mentioned in another reply on this thread that I live in the real world. And the sad thing is, here in the real world we get paid money to write code in languages other than [insert your favorite language here]. Hell, I even spent six years in the COBOL mines. By my own count I have programmed in upwards of twenty different languages for pay; and every single one of them sucked for one reason or another! I have to put bread on my table and support my family, so I did what I had to do, despite what my heart told me.
Here in the real world we often must do things like that. I envy those who have more choices. But I've only so much mind share and I need to spend it where it will return the most value in terms of dollars per hour, not personal satisfaction.
And if it was about personal satisfaction I would be nattering on at length about this programming language I have spend fifteen years designing and everyone should be using instead of [insert your favorite language here]. Sadly all I have to show for that wasted time is piles of yellow pads full of notes and about five thousand lines of partially working code...
P.S. Get a /. account and post with your real name. If your opinions are as sound as you feel they are, you shouldn't be shy about connecting your identity to them.
I think you missed my point: Code generators have improved so that the cost-of-change has gone down! At one time they were really only good for getting started by spitting out piles of repetitive, uninteresting code; afterwards you might tweak the generated code or have to change it for a bug fix, so you didn't want to regenerate. This is no longer entirely the case.
Check out some of the links here. Especially CodeWorker.
Mind you I am not entirely a fan of code generators myself, having been forced to use bad ones in the past. But they are good fits for certain kinds of problems, they really have improved recently and I was simply trying to answer the original question in the parent article in a meaningful way. I really do think they are going to be hot in the developer space soon. Unfortunately I expect a lot of PHBs are going to jump on the bandwagon and want us to use code generators in spaces where they aren't a good fit. For example, using a code generator in a case where a nice clean library is more suitable.
I'm not arguing that code generators and advanced IDE's are a form of duct tape -- only that they are a form of duct tape we need. Certainly there might be some magic tool out there that oblivates that nescessity; but until it is in general use I won't be using it to get my work done.
In other words, I live and work in the real world. In the real world things are often hacked together with twisted coat hangers, old pizza boxes and duct tape. So, to me, duct tape is a good thing.
You know, I hear that kind of thing all the time about LISP, Ruby and various flavors of declarative languages. But it is important to note that no one uses them for anything important. (OK, not entirely true I will admit -- there are big projects in LISP at least; but it is certainly true in general.) So, until the rest of us stop using 'broken' tools to write the software that actually runs the world, you really don't have a point.
Someone smarter than me said it best: "There are two types of programming languages; the ones that people bitch about and the ones that no one uses." -- Bjarne Stroustrup
I've already seen one post dissing code generators, but I expect to see that general class of software development tool to greatly increase in popularity over the next couple of years...
Why? Well mostly because they are getting better. Many of the newer code generation tools are very flexible and have some ability to preserve changes to the code; making them easier to fit into real development cycles. Also we are already seeing 'just in time' code generation as an optimization tool; that functionality, when combined with runtime environments like the Java Runtime or the CLR, is going to get easier and more powerful.
So, in the end, we may see developers tweaking code generation templates and filling in design forms/creating design diagrams in order to create some classes of software -- business software and game levels would probably benefit greatly from this scenario.
Obviously there are other classes of software development which would see much less benefit...
Personal computers have been out for ~30 years now. Let's compare this to automobiles; so far weve been through the build-it-yourself phase, the early manufactured phase, the introduction of 'luxury' phase, the low-price for the masses phase and are now moving towards the 'appliance' phase. At this point for automobiles it was the mid 1920's and the cranky old jalopies of the past were finally becoming reliable enough that non-enthusiasts could own and operate one. Automobiles were still some years from automatic transmissions and the road system some years from smooth freeways and good signage. But innovations like electric starters and improved distributors meant that you could drive your car without knowing, in detail, how internal combustion worked.
For what its worth, autos were also fifty years away from electronic ignition and the beginnings of pollution control. I think there are analogies there too.
-
Soyo SY-K7VM333 socket A microATX motherboard -- $39.00
-
AMD Duron 1.1GHz (200MHz FSB) Socket A CPU -- $34.00
-
11-Bay ATX Case w/300W Power Supply -- $19.00
-
128MB PC-2100 Double Data Rate (DDR) 184-pin (16x64) RAM -- $27.00
-
52x Beige IDE CD-ROM Drive -- $8.95
-
IBM Deskstar 20GB UDMA/100 7200 RPM IDE Hard Drive -- $34.00
Total is $161.95, not incl shipping, and you have to assemble yourself. So not $100, but not bad for a full-fledged computer with lots of power.I was at that reading at UW's Kane Hall, and Stephenson's description isn't quite like I remember it...
For one thing it was no stalemate; Gibson definately kicked his ass. Secondly Stephenson didn't even mention the six hours he spent tied to the Fremont Troll while Gibson chain-smoked and burned him with the cigs.
I've met David Ornstein and my impression is that he thinks of FlexWiki as being a colloborative product. (A very wiki-ish attitude.) However I am unsure if he separates what he does on his own time from what he does for Microsoft with anything other than very fuzzy (and rather wide) line.
Note that the 'father' of the wiki, Ward Cunningham, now works for Microsoft as well. What that means for the future of wikis or integration of wiki-like features into other products at MS I have no idea. But, in the absense of any fire, there does seem to be an awful lot of wiki-smoke here.
Does anyone in the Seattle area need a great hacker who would really rather be writing Python than C#?
I take it you prefer the, even more clumsy, term viruses for the plural?
I have some links here on Trufen about using virii that reduce the effects of illegal drugs.
Not exactly. His parents reminded him every morning, but with those short arms...