Agreed, and while you're at it, downloading a DEMO of the game is a really good idea. An example, BloodRayne 2 looks brilliant but I played the demo and found the cemera is maddeningly chaotic. Some people may have no issue with this, and so they will enjoy the game but for me the title is a waste of money. I wouldn't know that without having played the demo.
this feels basically like delaying an extra security heavy distro 6 weeks to implement verify a new security protocol implementation works correctly
Well put, it's what they do best so let them do it! Ubuntu is the friendliest distribution I have used to date, and I have no issue waiting another 6 weeks so they can say they put their best effort forward on this release.
I have to hand to them, the image search was pretty cool. Just one big scrolly page of images and they zoom in when you mouse over them. This is a lot better than the 50/page google provides. It's also a technique that's easy to copy so I imagine a lot of search sites will bend in this direction.
It's been done with Telnet, X-Windows, PC-Anywhere, Citrix and VNC. But not to the extent that I was suggesting.
Your employer hosts *HIS* data and *HIS* applications on a server to which you connect via X. That's a start. You still balance your checkbook at home on your Mac and I still do music production on my PC. But why should we have to duplicate the efforts already required by your employer for backups, power redundancy, routine maintenance, etc.?
I was trying to imagine a scenario where everything that everyone does could be hosted on the same back-end unit. Only with proper security would this work, because your personal data would be sitting on the same physical "server" as my work data, IBM's customer list and Uganda's purchasing system. The benefits of consolidation worldwide would be huge.
It's all very "Matrix", and we have plenty of reasons not to be willing to sign up for such an arrangement today, but one day it could make a lot of sense. Fifty years ago not many people would have guessed that every person in the world can video-conference each other from a global common network. "Um, hasn't this been basically implemented for years in the form of telephone?"... sounds a little short-sighted to me.
One day we may rely on centralized quantum computers that the average Joe won't be able to afford, or maybe won't need to afford. A standardized viewing mechanism could be relied upon, along with keystroke, voice and gesture entry, and a common mechanism for transmitting sound and other media could be defined.
Now if the security were managed correctly, you and I could visit our data from any workstation in the world, because the apps and data are all hosted. You could just identify yourself and take control of whatever data and applications are connected to you from wherever you are. Some folks may opt for better interface equipment (speakers!) but the network and processing power would be the same for everyone (and it would be enough).
[Flash back to modern day]
Today's in-the-browser desktops and applications are cute but right now they can't do much. It's interesting see developers working hard to provide these tools but it will be years before Microsoft and Google can provide a compelling "stay on this web page for everything you need" solution. It's obvious what THEY would get out of it (increased ad revenue), but so far we get nothing but a flashy AJAX demonstration.
4 or 5 years back I heard MS paid low salaries, but people were not deterred because of the other perks you got from working there. It wasn't the Google Campus with a spa and daycare, but supposedly working at MS was really fun, and you were a "made man" if you developed at MS because it was presumed easy to get hired somewhere after you had done a 4 year stint there.
After a while FireFox starts to chew up CPU cycles for me. I am almost positive it has to do with the Flash plugin.
This is still a small price to pay since it happens once every 3 - 4 days and I leave FireFox open literally all the time. I develop on Windows for a living but I don't trust IE for general browsing. Not even with Anti-Spyware and Popup Blockers.
You have an excellent point. I for one had no idea MSN had a search-only page, not sure why, it just never occurred to me to look for it. I think most users would admit the same.
I agree 100% about the first one. Even developers with similar time on the job often have tremendous gaps when compared with one another. We do not all learn the same, we do not all retain the same, and we do not all have the same creative gifts. I try to put people where they are strong and make sure they know that contribution is appreciated (lots of companies forget that last one).
But as for doing a job right, I DON'T think they meant every project should be done with framework X, service-oriented, maximum abstraction, perfect adherance to all the latest buzz-patterns, etc. I think a quick-and-dirty app *is* done right if you know its architecture and design doesn't need anything else. Ever. But larger efforts need to be planned, sponsors need iterative views into the direction and teams need to be prepared. In a nutshell, give each project the planning and quality effort it deserves.
As the saying goes, if you don't have time to do something right, why would you think you have time to do it over?
Look. I don't mean to be harsh, but either the person in charge of the servers has to be more competant (as in making sure they stay up) or they need to hire more staff.
I think the server issue was just an example that could be substituted for any situation where someone in the company needs our expertise on something. And of course problems close to them seem bigger than any others.
I think the "need to hire more staff" observation is the more likely (and realistic) one. I've been short staffed in my department for going on 4 years now and quite honestly i'm getting fed up with it. Combine that with theever growing perception that technical staff should be increasingly more available and you have the distraction and interruption nightmare.
One of the ways we try to combat the distraction effect is to make developers "unavailable" during certain hours of the day, but being short-staffed like we are it's only a matter of time until someone's hair is on fire and you have to go help out.
You might claim that we are not a well-run company. I won't argue that matter.
Browser delivers apps poorly
on
DOM Scripting
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
The browser is a *TERRIBLE* platform on which to deliver applications. Sure it's convenient to deliver applications on a thin client platform that already has universal install-base, but today's browser still makes this task very clumsy. DHTML is difficult to debug, you must abstract everything into libraries because of browser differences to get any productivity, scripted client-side code runs terribly slow and unless you are willing to bolt other technologies into the mix you must suffer pathetic 1990's-era least-common-denominator UI constructs like radio buttons and check boxes.
When tools like XUL or XAML truly come online and there are development tools (and debuggers) to support them, thin-client development will get a huge new boost. Until then we will continue to have to "fake it" with clumsy JS and bolt-ons like Applets / ActiveX / Flash / etc.
That's what I was wondering. If it's just for Picasa, who cares? I don't even see why Google is bothering, it's not like Google is going to win the hearts of every Linux user with Picasa. Picasa?!?! Linux crowd already has the ability to see Google's merits in this industry. If they want to be smart about it, rewrite it in Java or.NET/Mono and make THAT run cross-platform.
Maybe their goal is to actually port an application so it runs in Linux soley for the purpose of gaining experience doing so... then publicly bring that first-hand knowledge to the Windows development community as a left hook to Microsoft. Man, now I'm starting to see consipracies like the rest of you guys.
I think the article covers only one small aspect of flame wars: misinterpreting the tone of a message. That allows someone to get bent out of shape, but the real reason people are willing to engage in flame wars is because once they get bent out of shape they hide behind the relative safety of the Internet when they lash out at others.
In the real world, most people don't feel free to get all puffed up and lash out at others every time they get their noses bent out of shape. It doesn't make good sense because sooner or alter you are going to end up beaten to a pulp for having such a big mouth. With the relative anonymity of the Internet, however, many people (especially this volatile crowd) seem to lose all inhibition and come out guns blazing when it's not warranted.
It would be interesting to see what effect this change in personal boundaries has on comunication when flamers are not online; whether they are becoming increasingly more volatile in person.
You need an MP3 player and a good set of ear-covering headphones, brother. I could not survive without one. I sit directly across from tech support personnel and they have no idea how loud they are. Chopin or Rachmaninov doesn't distract me from my work but it does muffle out the surrounding junk noise.
IE 7 completely replaces your IE 6 components, so it's still pretty deeply nested in the bowels of Windows. For Beta 1 there was no provision for uninstall, in fact, and I suspect that hasn't changed (you won't see ME installing it). Hint: Don't install IE7 Beta on a production machine.
So true!!! I almost suffered permanent nerve damage to my thumb tip using those stupid round disc controllers. One hour of Sea Battle and I could barely feel my thumb!
You are right about #1, although not many readers here can see it.
MS licensed and distributed a stripped down copy of Hyper Terminal with Windows, from HilGraeve. They licensed and released a stripped down version of DiskKeeper in Windows 2000/XP/2003 from Executive. They also released a barely functional file zipping and unzipping tool with Windows. The list goes on.
It's common practice for Microsoft to release small, barely functional versions of add-on software with Windows... even *other* people's software. They do this in order to have Windows feel "complete" without making it impossible for other software companies to make a profit in that space. This has been happening for a long time.
Re:Why not do something CONSTRUCTIVE?
on
Mitnick on OSS
·
· Score: 1
Well I thought he was famous because he got caught. There are lots of people who could run circles around Mitnick technically.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed, and while you're at it, downloading a DEMO of the game is a really good idea. An example, BloodRayne 2 looks brilliant but I played the demo and found the cemera is maddeningly chaotic. Some people may have no issue with this, and so they will enjoy the game but for me the title is a waste of money. I wouldn't know that without having played the demo.
Man, that's a pretty web page. :D
this feels basically like delaying an extra security heavy distro 6 weeks to implement verify a new security protocol implementation works correctly
Well put, it's what they do best so let them do it! Ubuntu is the friendliest distribution I have used to date, and I have no issue waiting another 6 weeks so they can say they put their best effort forward on this release.
I have to hand to them, the image search was pretty cool. Just one big scrolly page of images and they zoom in when you mouse over them. This is a lot better than the 50/page google provides. It's also a technique that's easy to copy so I imagine a lot of search sites will bend in this direction.
Thanks for the tip.
It's been done with Telnet, X-Windows, PC-Anywhere, Citrix and VNC. But not to the extent that I was suggesting.
Your employer hosts *HIS* data and *HIS* applications on a server to which you connect via X. That's a start. You still balance your checkbook at home on your Mac and I still do music production on my PC. But why should we have to duplicate the efforts already required by your employer for backups, power redundancy, routine maintenance, etc.?
I was trying to imagine a scenario where everything that everyone does could be hosted on the same back-end unit. Only with proper security would this work, because your personal data would be sitting on the same physical "server" as my work data, IBM's customer list and Uganda's purchasing system. The benefits of consolidation worldwide would be huge.
It's all very "Matrix", and we have plenty of reasons not to be willing to sign up for such an arrangement today, but one day it could make a lot of sense. Fifty years ago not many people would have guessed that every person in the world can video-conference each other from a global common network. "Um, hasn't this been basically implemented for years in the form of telephone?"... sounds a little short-sighted to me.
No, no, THIS is the poster-boy for Slashdot. I think you can fit three in the cup holder at the theater.
[Zoom forward 50 years]
One day we may rely on centralized quantum computers that the average Joe won't be able to afford, or maybe won't need to afford. A standardized viewing mechanism could be relied upon, along with keystroke, voice and gesture entry, and a common mechanism for transmitting sound and other media could be defined.
Now if the security were managed correctly, you and I could visit our data from any workstation in the world, because the apps and data are all hosted. You could just identify yourself and take control of whatever data and applications are connected to you from wherever you are. Some folks may opt for better interface equipment (speakers!) but the network and processing power would be the same for everyone (and it would be enough).
[Flash back to modern day]
Today's in-the-browser desktops and applications are cute but right now they can't do much. It's interesting see developers working hard to provide these tools but it will be years before Microsoft and Google can provide a compelling "stay on this web page for everything you need" solution. It's obvious what THEY would get out of it (increased ad revenue), but so far we get nothing but a flashy AJAX demonstration.
4 or 5 years back I heard MS paid low salaries, but people were not deterred because of the other perks you got from working there. It wasn't the Google Campus with a spa and daycare, but supposedly working at MS was really fun, and you were a "made man" if you developed at MS because it was presumed easy to get hired somewhere after you had done a 4 year stint there.
That's just what I heard.
After a while FireFox starts to chew up CPU cycles for me. I am almost positive it has to do with the Flash plugin.
This is still a small price to pay since it happens once every 3 - 4 days and I leave FireFox open literally all the time. I develop on Windows for a living but I don't trust IE for general browsing. Not even with Anti-Spyware and Popup Blockers.
You have an excellent point. I for one had no idea MSN had a search-only page, not sure why, it just never occurred to me to look for it. I think most users would admit the same.
Dude! Lasers don't work under water! Oh wait...
I agree 100% about the first one. Even developers with similar time on the job often have tremendous gaps when compared with one another. We do not all learn the same, we do not all retain the same, and we do not all have the same creative gifts. I try to put people where they are strong and make sure they know that contribution is appreciated (lots of companies forget that last one).
But as for doing a job right, I DON'T think they meant every project should be done with framework X, service-oriented, maximum abstraction, perfect adherance to all the latest buzz-patterns, etc. I think a quick-and-dirty app *is* done right if you know its architecture and design doesn't need anything else. Ever. But larger efforts need to be planned, sponsors need iterative views into the direction and teams need to be prepared. In a nutshell, give each project the planning and quality effort it deserves.
As the saying goes, if you don't have time to do something right, why would you think you have time to do it over?
Since you said you like Basic:
http://www.freebasic.net/
Think QuickBasic with true Win32 binaries. The binaries are super small and super fast. Oh, and it runs on Linux too, if you are into that.
I think the server issue was just an example that could be substituted for any situation where someone in the company needs our expertise on something. And of course problems close to them seem bigger than any others.
I think the "need to hire more staff" observation is the more likely (and realistic) one. I've been short staffed in my department for going on 4 years now and quite honestly i'm getting fed up with it. Combine that with theever growing perception that technical staff should be increasingly more available and you have the distraction and interruption nightmare.
One of the ways we try to combat the distraction effect is to make developers "unavailable" during certain hours of the day, but being short-staffed like we are it's only a matter of time until someone's hair is on fire and you have to go help out.
You might claim that we are not a well-run company. I won't argue that matter.
The browser is a *TERRIBLE* platform on which to deliver applications. Sure it's convenient to deliver applications on a thin client platform that already has universal install-base, but today's browser still makes this task very clumsy. DHTML is difficult to debug, you must abstract everything into libraries because of browser differences to get any productivity, scripted client-side code runs terribly slow and unless you are willing to bolt other technologies into the mix you must suffer pathetic 1990's-era least-common-denominator UI constructs like radio buttons and check boxes.
When tools like XUL or XAML truly come online and there are development tools (and debuggers) to support them, thin-client development will get a huge new boost. Until then we will continue to have to "fake it" with clumsy JS and bolt-ons like Applets / ActiveX / Flash / etc.
That's what I was wondering. If it's just for Picasa, who cares? I don't even see why Google is bothering, it's not like Google is going to win the hearts of every Linux user with Picasa. Picasa?!?! Linux crowd already has the ability to see Google's merits in this industry. If they want to be smart about it, rewrite it in Java or .NET/Mono and make THAT run cross-platform.
Maybe their goal is to actually port an application so it runs in Linux soley for the purpose of gaining experience doing so... then publicly bring that first-hand knowledge to the Windows development community as a left hook to Microsoft. Man, now I'm starting to see consipracies like the rest of you guys.
I think the article covers only one small aspect of flame wars: misinterpreting the tone of a message. That allows someone to get bent out of shape, but the real reason people are willing to engage in flame wars is because once they get bent out of shape they hide behind the relative safety of the Internet when they lash out at others.
In the real world, most people don't feel free to get all puffed up and lash out at others every time they get their noses bent out of shape. It doesn't make good sense because sooner or alter you are going to end up beaten to a pulp for having such a big mouth. With the relative anonymity of the Internet, however, many people (especially this volatile crowd) seem to lose all inhibition and come out guns blazing when it's not warranted.
It would be interesting to see what effect this change in personal boundaries has on comunication when flamers are not online; whether they are becoming increasingly more volatile in person.
You need an MP3 player and a good set of ear-covering headphones, brother. I could not survive without one. I sit directly across from tech support personnel and they have no idea how loud they are. Chopin or Rachmaninov doesn't distract me from my work but it does muffle out the surrounding junk noise.
I for one am sickened by what I found while perusing your link, sir! The callous mockery made of Lord Vader in this... this.....
Behold, the pinnacle of heresy, Darth Tater!
IE 7 completely replaces your IE 6 components, so it's still pretty deeply nested in the bowels of Windows. For Beta 1 there was no provision for uninstall, in fact, and I suspect that hasn't changed (you won't see ME installing it). Hint: Don't install IE7 Beta on a production machine.
They didn't need a new IE until Firefox started creating bona fide competition.
So true!!! I almost suffered permanent nerve damage to my thumb tip using those stupid round disc controllers. One hour of Sea Battle and I could barely feel my thumb!
You are right about #1, although not many readers here can see it.
MS licensed and distributed a stripped down copy of Hyper Terminal with Windows, from HilGraeve. They licensed and released a stripped down version of DiskKeeper in Windows 2000/XP/2003 from Executive. They also released a barely functional file zipping and unzipping tool with Windows. The list goes on.
It's common practice for Microsoft to release small, barely functional versions of add-on software with Windows... even *other* people's software. They do this in order to have Windows feel "complete" without making it impossible for other software companies to make a profit in that space. This has been happening for a long time.
Well I thought he was famous because he got caught. There are lots of people who could run circles around Mitnick technically.
That's a terrific idea! ...for C programmers. And people who don't run Windows-only applications.