No problem doing embedded mission critical in C# or Java, but I would not (often) consider them for Real Time systems. Lots of embedded and mission critical systems actually do not require RT features. For RT, I'd stick with C.
Maybe, but I'd take almost any other tool over PHP and JS. PHP and JS are anti-patterns by their very nature. I'd take Java, Delphi, Visual Basic (.NET) and just about any other thing over PHP. JS (minimum amount) would be unavoidable.
ow many enterprise level web based sites/applications are there that don't use JavaScript vs. do use JavaScript?
Here is a list of programming languages used for enterprise applications today that are more common in the enterprise than Javascript:
COBOL, Basic including Visual Basic, Delphi, Excel (yes, serious, big-time apps are built on Excel), C#, C++ etc. Heck, a huge reason that XP is still king of the hill is VB6 and Delphi 6.
Enterprise doesn't mean big and performant. It means "important". The kind where you will lose your business if the app goes wrong, or even worse, you will go to jail for tax-issues.
Java is not important in enterprise development, it may never be. It is used, small scale, in some apps, but not many.
Look at it from a different point of view. Enterprise applications, the ones that are typically developed in-house, that serve very specific needs of an enterprise are not like Google, Gmail, Facebook etc. In fact they are on opposite sides of the spectrum.
The typical enterprise developer is a member of a small-ish team of developers who work day in and day out with vague specs, customers banging on his door, and a huge multitude of applications to maintain. Each enterprise developer frequently maintains 5 to 10, or even more, different apps day to day. Basically the average enterprise team is relatively small (comparatively) with a large number of apps, mostly of the type that are extensions of other apps. Integrating the CRM system with the existing billing system, merging the POS system, that is not AD enabled, with AD etc. In short, they are few developers with many, many applications.
That is the complete opposite of the Googles and Facebooks of the world. Here you typically have vast numbers of developers working on comparatively few projects. The requirements on the two sides are also direct opposite.
Javascript is the exact opposite of "the appropriate tool for the job" for the enterprise. If someone tells you he'll do your enterprise app in PHP and/or Javascript. Fire him and hire a CICS/COBOL engineer. The latter knows what he is doing. The PHP/Javascript dude is clueless, but he would fit in quite well at Facebook.
The entire.NET team for example. More and more of the web related stuff is going open, and they are actively working with the FOSS community. ASP.NET MVC is one of the best web frameworks out there (so good in fact that what Play! Framework took a lot of ideas from it, Play is one of the very best frameworks for Java - with some bad things like static controllers [which.NET MVC doesn't have, thankfully]), highly inspired by some of the good Ruby stuff, is going all open source and at the same time incorporating the best of open source frameworks out there. It's not like the Microsoft of old would have made jQuery and jQueryUI first class citizens like it has in.NET MVC.
They use change tracking and comments, but hardly ever stylesheets... Documentation, particularly professionally-written documentation, on the other hand, needs named styles
Perhaps my Enterprise experience is different than yours, partly possibly because I have worked mostly for ISO certified Enterprises. That's why I included style sheets, since an ISO certified Enterprise spends a lot of time documenting process, where style sheets are critical. I would imagine this also applies to any Legal departments or Law firms. If you deal a lot with other ISO certified companies, you'll need them for sure.
For (even large) companies that mostly produce documents for human consumption with few guidelines on how to structure the documents, I would assume you are right. Though, when I "teach" people to use Word, I tell them to never hit Enter twice and that using bold, italics or similar is evil. People should get used to always using named styles.
I am in Europe, and where I live, we are on 100% renewables (hydro power). Still, if we went 100% EV over a time span of, say, a decade, it would have a tremendous negative impact on CO2 emissions. You see, we currently export power, but at our current production, we can not in any meaningful way, accommodate the increase in electricity usage that a switch to EVs would demand. The result would therefore be that we would have to import significant amounts of electricity. This extra energy has to come from somewhere, in fact, we would have to build quite a few new plants just to produce all this energy. The vast majority of those plants would be either coal or oil based.
This is what the article you refer to do not take into consideration. Switch the US to all EV, and the extra power requirements would be so high that the only way to accommodate them would be to build a significant number of new coal-fired power plants. Renewables are not an alternative, and nuclear is in most cases out of the question.
Germany is (idiotically enough) shutting down nuclear power plants, the increase in CO2 emissions from that alone are significant. Add the demand for (relatively inexpensive) electricity from a theoretical all EV European car fleet, and you'd have to build enormous amounts of new coal-fired power plants. Europe and the US can not facilitate the demand from an all EV fleet without a huge increase in capacity, and at the moment, and for the near to mid future, that increase in demand is going to be satisfied with coal, oil etc.
Why would I do that? Animals are there for us to eat. We are predators, they are prey. Ah, you mean for AGW? Nah. Nah, I live in a fucking cold place, I welcome a little, nay, a LOT of global warming. Keep it coming honey.
Yes, my blanket statement is correct, until you change energy production from fossil fuel to renewables. The problem is, we are doing EVs NOW, and alternative fuels are a MAYBE at some point in the future. So, yes, EVs ARE worse than gas gusslers, but they may not be in a hypothetical future.
That is, to a large degree the fault of the AGW lobby. For decades we have heard how important it is for us to go green, and the two main areas that has been focused on is getting us into electric cars and putting solar panels onto our roofs. The latter is slowly becoming possible as an energy source, but is still significantly more carbon intensive than most alternatives, and the former is just a retarded idea. Electrical cars have a carbon foot print that is at least as high as gas guzzlers, and in most cases significantly higher. In addition, the gas guzzlers are close to totally irrelevant as CO2 sources, so the Electrical Car is a terrible solution to a non-problem.
These things are easy to show, so the anti-AGW crowd has a field day with the morons in the AGW crowd. Irrespective of whether AGW is a real problem or not.
No, we don't. A lot of people misunderstand what an IQ test is and what it measures, and then they misunderstandingly call bullshit. That's bullshit. IQ measures one thing, and one thing only, with a 100% degree of accuracy: How you score on IQ tests. I have never seen anyone claiming it measures anything else.
The article referred to is the Bullshit, at leas the summary.
Slashdot Mirror
The corporations are own by the citizens too.
embedded mission critical systems
No problem doing embedded mission critical in C# or Java, but I would not (often) consider them for Real Time systems. Lots of embedded and mission critical systems actually do not require RT features. For RT, I'd stick with C.
Not only does lead degrade cognitive abilities and lower intelligence
Seems like it.
Sounds like you are personally biased against PHP more than anything else
I am personally biased against all anti-patterns.
Maybe, but I'd take almost any other tool over PHP and JS. PHP and JS are anti-patterns by their very nature. I'd take Java, Delphi, Visual Basic (.NET) and just about any other thing over PHP. JS (minimum amount) would be unavoidable.
Not his fault since I wrote (in one place) Java where I meant Javascript
I meant JavaScript. Java is very important in the enterprise.
... script. Java is very important-
Yeah, don't know why I didn't include Java, it's the language I work with the most, and I am one of the described Enterprise developers.
ow many enterprise level web based sites/applications are there that don't use JavaScript vs. do use JavaScript?
Here is a list of programming languages used for enterprise applications today that are more common in the enterprise than Javascript:
COBOL, Basic including Visual Basic, Delphi, Excel (yes, serious, big-time apps are built on Excel), C#, C++ etc. Heck, a huge reason that XP is still king of the hill is VB6 and Delphi 6.
Enterprise doesn't mean big and performant. It means "important". The kind where you will lose your business if the app goes wrong, or even worse, you will go to jail for tax-issues.
Java is not important in enterprise development, it may never be. It is used, small scale, in some apps, but not many.
Look at it from a different point of view. Enterprise applications, the ones that are typically developed in-house, that serve very specific needs of an enterprise are not like Google, Gmail, Facebook etc. In fact they are on opposite sides of the spectrum.
The typical enterprise developer is a member of a small-ish team of developers who work day in and day out with vague specs, customers banging on his door, and a huge multitude of applications to maintain. Each enterprise developer frequently maintains 5 to 10, or even more, different apps day to day. Basically the average enterprise team is relatively small (comparatively) with a large number of apps, mostly of the type that are extensions of other apps. Integrating the CRM system with the existing billing system, merging the POS system, that is not AD enabled, with AD etc. In short, they are few developers with many, many applications.
That is the complete opposite of the Googles and Facebooks of the world. Here you typically have vast numbers of developers working on comparatively few projects. The requirements on the two sides are also direct opposite.
Javascript is the exact opposite of "the appropriate tool for the job" for the enterprise. If someone tells you he'll do your enterprise app in PHP and/or Javascript. Fire him and hire a CICS/COBOL engineer. The latter knows what he is doing. The PHP/Javascript dude is clueless, but he would fit in quite well at Facebook.
Did you think there was Chicken in a McChicken. How cute.
Microsoft won't allow free YouTube player replacements in their app store
BZZZT! WRONG!
The entire .NET team for example. More and more of the web related stuff is going open, and they are actively working with the FOSS community. ASP .NET MVC is one of the best web frameworks out there (so good in fact that what Play! Framework took a lot of ideas from it, Play is one of the very best frameworks for Java - with some bad things like static controllers [which .NET MVC doesn't have, thankfully]), highly inspired by some of the good Ruby stuff, is going all open source and at the same time incorporating the best of open source frameworks out there. It's not like the Microsoft of old would have made jQuery and jQueryUI first class citizens like it has in .NET MVC.
They are cheap in most places defined as "abroad".
They use change tracking and comments, but hardly ever stylesheets ... Documentation, particularly professionally-written documentation, on the other hand, needs named styles
Perhaps my Enterprise experience is different than yours, partly possibly because I have worked mostly for ISO certified Enterprises. That's why I included style sheets, since an ISO certified Enterprise spends a lot of time documenting process, where style sheets are critical. I would imagine this also applies to any Legal departments or Law firms. If you deal a lot with other ISO certified companies, you'll need them for sure.
For (even large) companies that mostly produce documents for human consumption with few guidelines on how to structure the documents, I would assume you are right. Though, when I "teach" people to use Word, I tell them to never hit Enter twice and that using bold, italics or similar is evil. People should get used to always using named styles.
But the handful of people who don't fit in that category set the standards, and they need features like tracking changes, comments, and stylesheets
That's not a handful, that describes basically the entire enterprise world.
Blabber,
Eh? Blabber.
I am in Europe, and where I live, we are on 100% renewables (hydro power). Still, if we went 100% EV over a time span of, say, a decade, it would have a tremendous negative impact on CO2 emissions. You see, we currently export power, but at our current production, we can not in any meaningful way, accommodate the increase in electricity usage that a switch to EVs would demand. The result would therefore be that we would have to import significant amounts of electricity. This extra energy has to come from somewhere, in fact, we would have to build quite a few new plants just to produce all this energy. The vast majority of those plants would be either coal or oil based.
This is what the article you refer to do not take into consideration. Switch the US to all EV, and the extra power requirements would be so high that the only way to accommodate them would be to build a significant number of new coal-fired power plants. Renewables are not an alternative, and nuclear is in most cases out of the question.
Germany is (idiotically enough) shutting down nuclear power plants, the increase in CO2 emissions from that alone are significant. Add the demand for (relatively inexpensive) electricity from a theoretical all EV European car fleet, and you'd have to build enormous amounts of new coal-fired power plants. Europe and the US can not facilitate the demand from an all EV fleet without a huge increase in capacity, and at the moment, and for the near to mid future, that increase in demand is going to be satisfied with coal, oil etc.
Why would I do that? Animals are there for us to eat. We are predators, they are prey. Ah, you mean for AGW? Nah. Nah, I live in a fucking cold place, I welcome a little, nay, a LOT of global warming. Keep it coming honey.
Yes, my blanket statement is correct, until you change energy production from fossil fuel to renewables. The problem is, we are doing EVs NOW, and alternative fuels are a MAYBE at some point in the future. So, yes, EVs ARE worse than gas gusslers, but they may not be in a hypothetical future.
Completely wrong
It is? So electrical cars are less carbon intensive than gasoline cars?
http://www.world-nuclear.org/education/comparativeco2.html
Apparently not, you seemingly answered something completely different than I stated. OK.
That is, to a large degree the fault of the AGW lobby. For decades we have heard how important it is for us to go green, and the two main areas that has been focused on is getting us into electric cars and putting solar panels onto our roofs. The latter is slowly becoming possible as an energy source, but is still significantly more carbon intensive than most alternatives, and the former is just a retarded idea. Electrical cars have a carbon foot print that is at least as high as gas guzzlers, and in most cases significantly higher. In addition, the gas guzzlers are close to totally irrelevant as CO2 sources, so the Electrical Car is a terrible solution to a non-problem.
These things are easy to show, so the anti-AGW crowd has a field day with the morons in the AGW crowd. Irrespective of whether AGW is a real problem or not.
We all know it's bullshit
No, we don't. A lot of people misunderstand what an IQ test is and what it measures, and then they misunderstandingly call bullshit. That's bullshit. IQ measures one thing, and one thing only, with a 100% degree of accuracy: How you score on IQ tests. I have never seen anyone claiming it measures anything else.
The article referred to is the Bullshit, at leas the summary.