And what you don't understand is that the "Rapid Development" (or proto typing, as we used to call it years ago), only works well when your developers can plan ahead.
If people don't commit to the system, then of course it won't work.
If I tell you that a screwdriver is for screws, you can't call me wrong just because you're using it to pound nails.
The problem is, you're still shipping a pre-pre-pre-alpha prototype. Then charging the customer for a pre-pre-beta 2.0 version. Then charging them again for an incredibly buggy 3.0 release candidate. And so on.
Wrong. Your pre-pre-pre-alpha prototype is supposed to be a tested and solid project. Instead of cramming half implemented features in and having a constantly broken system, you implement a few features well. The customer doesn't need to see a prototype of everything in the first go around.
The big problem that people hit is that they fake demo stuff which isn't complete. The customer, and often management see it "working" and think they can pile more work on. You've dug yourself into a ditch right out of the game. You may get pressure early to "add more stuff" but as things start rolling everyone will be happier with a constant stream of solid software whith limited functionality as opposed to the buggy vaporware.
The movement to develop "quick software" is not for the sake of developing something fast at the expense of other concerns. It is meant to address requirements problems, which are the life or death of an applciation.
It's rare for a customer to know what they want. Even worse, alot of development happens without customer involvement. For example, there is usually a huge early requirements meetings, then developers walk away and write code for 6 months. Sure there are demos in between, but they are usually heavily scripted to give the illusion of progress. At the end the developer shows up with a system and the customer wants to change about a bazillion changes.
So...the recent movements in agile or rapid or whatever you call it grew to address these issues. By getting up a functional prototype quickly, you get the customer usuefully involved early in the process. They can use the system and begin to get an idea of what they really want. If you chunk into 4 or 6 week cycles you can have continuous deliverables. And if you focus on everything such as testing, documentation, and deployment from the get go, you can have complete systems for each cycle so you always have demo ready versions. With frequent, complete releases the customers (and management) are much less worried about progress, which means less stress for the developers.
Somewhat idealistic, I know, but it works pretty well.
You used the example of a Debian server being hacked, with no other supporting facts, to say that Microsoft and corporate America are bad and open source is good.
Thanks for the good propaganda example. Kids, are you paying attention?
Ask Slashdot: Why do gov't 'puters have net access?
Why shouldn't they? They need to do work and send email to people outside the government like the rest of us. How do you think, for example, all the tax forms show up on IRS.gov? Magic?
Classified computers do not have access to the normal internet, so when you see these break-in stories, no classified information was compromised, unless some dope went out of his way to get info from a class system to an unclass one.
What a terrible way to look at the issue. You're making it into a popularity contest. Don't forget that this same reasoning is why our political system sucks sometimes. Politicians spent money to play games with our heads, and we suck it up.
Yes, if people you admire have viewpoints on something, that should get you interested in the issue, however, your opinion needs to be based on your intrepertation of the facts, not on what the cool kids or the bad guys think.
This is why I don't think Blizzard will make a Starcraft or Diablo MMORPG. Nobody would leave WoW to start over.
Sure they would. Just look at the endless cries for new servers in WoW. People are always starting new characters on new servers, and they can take NOTHING with them except for experience. (ignoring realm transfers here).
If Blizzard starts a new MMORPG, they will likely have a very large percentage of their customer base paying for both games. It's a bonus for Blizzard because the $$ can increase faster than the load, since the addicts cannot give much more time to the games, but the can always give more $$ for new games.
It will be very interesting to see what happens during the 2008 Olympics when a ton of Westerners are getting their internet gimped.
I wonder if China will have free internet zones to avoid bad press.
I've been through undergrad and grad schools in the US and I have to say that there were more than a few courses where I didn't learn anything.
Maybe that was your problem. At the college level, the learning is up to you.
I don't want to souns cliche, but you get out of it what you put into it. Really.
American universities attract people and ideas from all over the world. If you can't learn in an environment like that, maybe you should stick to playing video games.
IT and specifically web development is so big that a big chunk of the "techies" are now idiots. It started when the business guys who could hack HTML started calling themselves geeks, but the journey ends here.
This Web 2.0 movement (or movements) may not supplant Web 1.0
I remember PHBs saying equally ridiculous things about XML when it came out, how it would revolutionize the world and everything would magically talk to each other. Now we see people in all groups saying the same thing about 6 year old tech... oh, I mean, Web 2.0
So, um, can anyone tell me how HTML, JavaScript, and Stylesheets supplants, um...., HTML, JavaScript, and Stylesheets?
This 'debunking guide' has language just as smarmy and referenceless statements just like conspiracy videos. That degrades its credibility, in my eyes. I was keen on seeing a decent debunking of the loose change video, but this guide is simply a troll. If you want to be taken seriously, speak seriously. Here are a few select quotes:
Yeah, that was my reaction too. I got excited when I read this part in the beginning:
"To keep you from jumping to the end, I'll tell you now that in this hour and twenty-minute video I
counted 81 errors of fact (statements like "1+1 = 3"). In additon, I counted 345 instances of
conjecture not supported by evidence, logical fallacies, uses of images that do not support the
conclusions being drawn, and other flubs. And that's only counting errors of commission. The
errors of omission are are far worse."
But he doesn't provide the facts or analysis on these points, just whitty comments. There is some good stuff in here, but it needs alot more work. Weak stuff like this just fuels the tin foil hat brigade.
It's funny, you actually post a counter argument which prompted a slew of replies, yet you get modded into the ground. Your attempt to start a discussion was gimped because you dare speak against the hive mind. I don't see any difference between the actions of Slashdot modding, and those of the Bush administration trying to squash this case.
You bring up a great point in that the government has good intentions for what they did. There was an intelligence breakdown and we got raped on our own soil. The administration decided to do what it took to try to prevent this from happening again. Unfortunately they stepped outside the bounds of out legal and civil rights system.
And unfortunately, the real story here of the government trying to do the right thing by doing the wrong thing won't get meaningful discussion on this site.
Lets hope this gets fixed...c'mon modders. Otherwise I fear we're doomed to continue to have poor leadership because the people just want to close their eyes and cover their ears and scream "THE GOVERNMENT IS EVIL" instead of taking a real look at the issues and involving themselves in the process.
How is clicking on the first result from a Google search dubious?
I have a mental filter which ignores those, but I was with an aunt who did a Google search and naturally clicked on the first result before I could yell "no, don't click those ones!"
How can you expect the general public to not think the first results from the best search engine aren't safe? That's like putting an exit ramp off of I95 (along the US east coast) which takes the cars off a cliff...then calling anyone who accidentally takes the exit stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
Feel free to suggest a better word.
I think it's perfect
And what you don't understand is that the "Rapid Development" (or proto typing, as we used to call it years ago), only works well when your developers can plan ahead.
If people don't commit to the system, then of course it won't work.
If I tell you that a screwdriver is for screws, you can't call me wrong just because you're using it to pound nails.
The problem is, you're still shipping a pre-pre-pre-alpha prototype. Then charging the customer for a pre-pre-beta 2.0 version. Then charging them again for an incredibly buggy 3.0 release candidate. And so on.
Wrong. Your pre-pre-pre-alpha prototype is supposed to be a tested and solid project. Instead of cramming half implemented features in and having a constantly broken system, you implement a few features well. The customer doesn't need to see a prototype of everything in the first go around.
The big problem that people hit is that they fake demo stuff which isn't complete. The customer, and often management see it "working" and think they can pile more work on. You've dug yourself into a ditch right out of the game. You may get pressure early to "add more stuff" but as things start rolling everyone will be happier with a constant stream of solid software whith limited functionality as opposed to the buggy vaporware.
However if they are licensed anally (as I suspect they will be) then this service is useless.
Wow, I guess RIAA/MPAA & friends really are out to screw us over.
The movement to develop "quick software" is not for the sake of developing something fast at the expense of other concerns. It is meant to address requirements problems, which are the life or death of an applciation.
It's rare for a customer to know what they want. Even worse, alot of development happens without customer involvement. For example, there is usually a huge early requirements meetings, then developers walk away and write code for 6 months. Sure there are demos in between, but they are usually heavily scripted to give the illusion of progress. At the end the developer shows up with a system and the customer wants to change about a bazillion changes.
So...the recent movements in agile or rapid or whatever you call it grew to address these issues. By getting up a functional prototype quickly, you get the customer usuefully involved early in the process. They can use the system and begin to get an idea of what they really want. If you chunk into 4 or 6 week cycles you can have continuous deliverables. And if you focus on everything such as testing, documentation, and deployment from the get go, you can have complete systems for each cycle so you always have demo ready versions. With frequent, complete releases the customers (and management) are much less worried about progress, which means less stress for the developers.
Somewhat idealistic, I know, but it works pretty well.
What the hell does that mean?
I think we need to start with: "Learn how to communicate"
3+ gal gasoline and higher cost of borrowing are beginning to weigh the US consumer. Things are going to get much worse.
Oh goodie. If you kill yourself, can I have your stuff?
Why when this happens on a Windows server is "OMG! Windows is insecure! M$ is evil!!!!"
Don't forget that people would be making fun of the incompetent MCSE admin for not enforcing a complex password policy
You used the example of a Debian server being hacked, with no other supporting facts, to say that Microsoft and corporate America are bad and open source is good.
Thanks for the good propaganda example. Kids, are you paying attention?
Ask Slashdot: Why do gov't 'puters have net access?
Why shouldn't they? They need to do work and send email to people outside the government like the rest of us. How do you think, for example, all the tax forms show up on IRS.gov? Magic?
Classified computers do not have access to the normal internet, so when you see these break-in stories, no classified information was compromised, unless some dope went out of his way to get info from a class system to an unclass one.
This one is really bad.
Almost every serious OO developer who starts working with databases comes up with their own object-relational mapping implementation.
Computer nerds think other computer nerds are clueless.
In tomorrow's news, 90% of people think they are better than average drivers.
carry a small EMP generator
Dear Slashdot posters,
It is not necessary to force an EMP reference into every single post which mentions the operation of electronic devices.
Thank you,
Concerned Citizen
Who do you think is right?
What a terrible way to look at the issue. You're making it into a popularity contest. Don't forget that this same reasoning is why our political system sucks sometimes. Politicians spent money to play games with our heads, and we suck it up.
Yes, if people you admire have viewpoints on something, that should get you interested in the issue, however, your opinion needs to be based on your intrepertation of the facts, not on what the cool kids or the bad guys think.
This is why I don't think Blizzard will make a Starcraft or Diablo MMORPG. Nobody would leave WoW to start over.
Sure they would. Just look at the endless cries for new servers in WoW. People are always starting new characters on new servers, and they can take NOTHING with them except for experience. (ignoring realm transfers here).
If Blizzard starts a new MMORPG, they will likely have a very large percentage of their customer base paying for both games. It's a bonus for Blizzard because the $$ can increase faster than the load, since the addicts cannot give much more time to the games, but the can always give more $$ for new games.
There is no limit to it.
That's a big problem when designing hardware and efficient software.
It will be very interesting to see what happens during the 2008 Olympics when a ton of Westerners are getting their internet gimped. I wonder if China will have free internet zones to avoid bad press.
You need to wait for Google Death
I've been through undergrad and grad schools in the US and I have to say that there were more than a few courses where I didn't learn anything.
Maybe that was your problem. At the college level, the learning is up to you.
I don't want to souns cliche, but you get out of it what you put into it. Really.
American universities attract people and ideas from all over the world. If you can't learn in an environment like that, maybe you should stick to playing video games.
Oh, this is too easy.
I can tell you two facts about the parent poster
1) He's addicted to World of Warcraft
2) He hates himself and the world for it.
IT and specifically web development is so big that a big chunk of the "techies" are now idiots. It started when the business guys who could hack HTML started calling themselves geeks, but the journey ends here.
This Web 2.0 movement (or movements) may not supplant Web 1.0
I remember PHBs saying equally ridiculous things about XML when it came out, how it would revolutionize the world and everything would magically talk to each other. Now we see people in all groups saying the same thing about 6 year old tech... oh, I mean, Web 2.0
So, um, can anyone tell me how HTML, JavaScript, and Stylesheets supplants, um...., HTML, JavaScript, and Stylesheets?
I've also seen Avast find things which both Symantec and AVG had missed.
This 'debunking guide' has language just as smarmy and referenceless statements just like conspiracy videos. That degrades its credibility, in my eyes. I was keen on seeing a decent debunking of the loose change video, but this guide is simply a troll. If you want to be taken seriously, speak seriously. Here are a few select quotes:
Yeah, that was my reaction too. I got excited when I read this part in the beginning:
"To keep you from jumping to the end, I'll tell you now that in this hour and twenty-minute video I counted 81 errors of fact (statements like "1+1 = 3"). In additon, I counted 345 instances of conjecture not supported by evidence, logical fallacies, uses of images that do not support the conclusions being drawn, and other flubs. And that's only counting errors of commission. The errors of omission are are far worse."
But he doesn't provide the facts or analysis on these points, just whitty comments. There is some good stuff in here, but it needs alot more work. Weak stuff like this just fuels the tin foil hat brigade.
It's funny, you actually post a counter argument which prompted a slew of replies, yet you get modded into the ground. Your attempt to start a discussion was gimped because you dare speak against the hive mind. I don't see any difference between the actions of Slashdot modding, and those of the Bush administration trying to squash this case.
You bring up a great point in that the government has good intentions for what they did. There was an intelligence breakdown and we got raped on our own soil. The administration decided to do what it took to try to prevent this from happening again. Unfortunately they stepped outside the bounds of out legal and civil rights system.
And unfortunately, the real story here of the government trying to do the right thing by doing the wrong thing won't get meaningful discussion on this site.
Lets hope this gets fixed...c'mon modders. Otherwise I fear we're doomed to continue to have poor leadership because the people just want to close their eyes and cover their ears and scream "THE GOVERNMENT IS EVIL" instead of taking a real look at the issues and involving themselves in the process.
dubious links?
How is clicking on the first result from a Google search dubious?
I have a mental filter which ignores those, but I was with an aunt who did a Google search and naturally clicked on the first result before I could yell "no, don't click those ones!"
How can you expect the general public to not think the first results from the best search engine aren't safe? That's like putting an exit ramp off of I95 (along the US east coast) which takes the cars off a cliff...then calling anyone who accidentally takes the exit stupid.