I used Notes at a place I consulted at in the late 90's, and I thought it was pretty good, at least as a concept, for it kept losing messages for some reason. Perhaps it was configured wrong.
I even once started an OSS project to emulate the parts of it I liked. But I got distracted and never finished.
For example, you could pose a question, and list all pending questions, and sort or filter them by project, application, entity, etc. based on user-defined categories or lists. Most places use email or SharePoint instead, and they both suck at it. Sure, you could build a typical CRUD application to do the same, but you'd be hard-wiring in the structure more or less. Notes is more organic. It's sort of Wiki meets SharePoint meets blog meets email.
If Oracle Forms was so great, and Oracle fucked it up, then blame Oracle, not Java.
Okay, Oracle developed a CRUD-centric programming language and IDE roughly around the late 1980's. It used a relatively thin client "CRUD browser" for lack of a batter name that users downloaded which allowed them run multiple Oracle Forms (OF) applications.
The client ("browser") was pretty easy to install and upgrade, and applications developers could develop applications quite quickly using the Oracle Forms stack.
Then, about 15 years ago Oracle decided to discontinue their dedicated CRUD browser and use a Java-based version of the browser instead. The OF programming language and IDE is mostly the same, just the client implementation changed. THIS is what ruined a good thing. Managing client-side Java engine versions is a big corporate headache. Java applets failed, not OF itself. They should have continued with the dedicated CRUD browser.
You donâ(TM)t think the programming world is more complicated than it was back in the 80s? You must not be a programmer. Not everyone has the same CPU, memory, and screen resolution of your own personal workstation. They arenâ(TM)t using the same written language, time zone, system of weights and measures, color palate, and input devices you are using, either.
I'm mostly talking about business CRUD applications. Nobody is going to do payroll on an iPhone. I don't know why you are bringing up time zones and color palates. Specific scenarios would help. Are you talking about internationalization? OF doesn't preclude such. And, I already agreed the results were not stylistically in fashion, but chasing fashion is not cheap.
The OF applications still work just fine at our org, minus the Java problems, per above.
1/7th the speed of the other teams?
That's a typo clarified in a later reply, I meant 7x as productive, such as coding 21 apps for every 3 the web-stacks produce.
You think that web browsers are the PROBLEM and all you are asking for is a universal platform for server-centric computing where the client isnâ(TM)t asked to do any of the heavy lifting? The web browser IS that universal platform you fucking tool.
Web browsers suck for that purpose. It would take a while to explain why.
The problem with simplification is that not everyone wants their applications to look and act alike. Commercial products must differentiate themselves enough so that people understand they are different and choose the one they prefer based upon features etc they provide.
I'm mostly talking about internal applications such that marketing aspects are not an issue. But humans do judge books by their cover and chase visual fashion fads, and that is indeed part of the problem, making us always start over instead of perfecting existing techniques and conventions. PHB's abound.
You know what is easier since the 80s? Getting your hands on good programming tools....with zero (additional) cash outlay than most of the industry was able to do during the entire decade of the 80s
That's true, but education of newbies is kind of a different topic. By the way, Oracle used to give away a student kit for free, I believe. But just because a stack is easy for students and newbies to obtain doesn't make it productive in a normal corporate environment in the medium and long term.
And the good ideas of OF, Delphi, Powerbuilder etc. can be cloned in a generic sense and put into an OSS project. Most of their good ideas are not proprietary.
than can physically sit at your own personal workstation where you have coded-up that 50-line basic program that âoeworks just fineâ for you.
Where did I propose that? I'm not understanding what scenarios are playing
My wife wants us to buy stock in Facebook because the stock is relatively cheap right now compared to its past. I told her there is too much of a chance it will turn into the next MySpace and dwindle, leaving stockholders holding the bag. Social media users have proven fickle. But if I turn out wrong down the road, she'll keep reminding me; it's a wife's God-given "job".
Re: "can crank out applications at about 1/7 the pace"
It should be "at 7 times the pace": 7 applications per 1 application from the web stacks. I should also clarify it doesn't really speed up the analysis side of things by 7 times, but because they can make an actual product faster than others make examples and prototypes, it does speed up the feedback cycle with customers to a degree. (Our web stacks could probably be simplified to some degree also, but our shop is stuck in habits. With a well-tuned web-stack, per fitting our org, the ratio would probably be 3-to-1.)
Re: "learn from the failure Java applets and Flash"
Should be: "learn from the failure of Java applets and Flash"
However, claiming that it's the "end of the world" because it is irreversible and will make the planet inhospitable to human life is complete crap and counterproductive because it leads to dispair rather than action.
Perhaps the phrasing could be tuned, but I read it as merely a warning that there is a sufficient possibility of it creating a run-away feedback cycle that would make life very difficult for humans. The probability of such is high enough that we should at least be on the alert.
Let's say half died. 50% of humans dying is not really "end of the world", but it is certainly catastrophic for humanity (at least). I didn't even see where they used "end of the world". One article uses the word "Apocalyptic". I don't know if "Apocalyptic" requires 100% to die or not. What percent have to die to qualify for "Apocalyptic"? 30%? 70%? 92.4927%? English is vague and lossy, headlines embellish, same as it ever was; I don't see a reason to get so "parsey" over non-specific words.
Should we not worry if there's a risk of half dying, but DO worry if all die?
Your biggest sin is accusing the jury AND me of various motivations using very poor evidence, that comes across as "your type always does/thinks X, therefore you are probably doing/thinking X here."
I not going to continue to debate somebody who fails at the basics. I shouldn't have let it get this far. I prefer logical rational people with clear lines of evidence. You are NOT one.
Most people who claim to be good at guessing motivations out loud are usually bozos.
By the way, the main purpose of "sanctuary cities" is so that illegal immigrants corporate with local law enforcement. If cops rat them out, they have no incentive to cooperate, and crime goes up. You should know that. You've probably heard that argument, but will say something like, "That's just an excuse to hide their REAL motivation of kissing up to illegals." Am I right?
So it needs to be 100% or nothing? Incremental progress isn't good enough, so why bother at all?
I'm just saying the original post is misleading and leaves out important information. While not technically wrong, it is misleading, or at least poorly written.
It's a good thing the USA is making progress, BUT that doesn't excuse poor article quality.
You are part of the problem here.
What problem? Pointing out poorly-written articles is causing a problem? Call me a "rebel" then! I won't stop.
Are you saying the US has more coal plants, or factories, or what? Coal can be replaced by solar, wind, etc.
I do agree there are different ways to score, such as whether consuming items that pollute at foreign manufacturers should count against the producer or consumer. In my opinion, both parties are guilty and perhaps the demerit should be split between both.
The upside is it will be so obvious that Republicans cannot deny it's happening.
However, they'll probably blame it on Democrats somehow, maybe claiming that catering to LGBTQ made God angry, who then baked Earth as punishment. You think I'm joking, don't you?
You chose to fixate on this minor topic after flailing at the major ones.
May I see your Mind-Reader Certificate, please?
Democrats are the party of illegal immigration.
Again, both parties are, based on their history. I will agree that GOP's voting base is less likely to support it, but GOP politicians support it and ignore voters because business pays them Yuuuge bucks to allow illegals in. GOP can pull this off because they give it lip service while they are ignoring voters.
The direction doesn't matter much, for the USA is still a bigger "carbon pig" per capita than those countries. The fact your linked article failed to disclose that makes me reluctant to trust their objectivity, being it's a key metric when comparing countries.
I just find it better to focus on one topic at a time if it looks like it will be a long, drawn-out discussion. Otherwise, one is dealing with 2+ long drawn-out interweaving discussions.
It fits a pattern of libshit cities like San Francisco.
I could play the same game and say most red-state Fox/Rush media consumers are brainwashed such that they automatically assume that a vast majority of San Franciscans are heavily biased toward pro-illegal-immigration such that the jurors cannot make fair jury decisions.
Using this brainwash assumption, I could state that your automatic bias makes you unfit to apply Occam's Razor. QED2.
If you had statistical evidence that X do Y at Z% of the time, you may have a case. But "Hannity said so" is not statistical evidence.
Why do you refuse to talk about the abolition of ICE?
After you admit you screwed up the first topic. Finish your plate before get you desert, young lady.
1. Get your coders all drunk and stoned. 2. Pressure them to write lots of code. 3. Have testers find all the bugs. 4. Have the (now sober) coders plug their bugs with end-point logic, but not outright remove them. 5. Profit!
Slashdot Mirror
Just get your own private email server.
Spaaace Fooorce!
N. Korea will nuke it in the middle of the Pacific for half that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I used Notes at a place I consulted at in the late 90's, and I thought it was pretty good, at least as a concept, for it kept losing messages for some reason. Perhaps it was configured wrong.
I even once started an OSS project to emulate the parts of it I liked. But I got distracted and never finished.
For example, you could pose a question, and list all pending questions, and sort or filter them by project, application, entity, etc. based on user-defined categories or lists. Most places use email or SharePoint instead, and they both suck at it. Sure, you could build a typical CRUD application to do the same, but you'd be hard-wiring in the structure more or less. Notes is more organic. It's sort of Wiki meets SharePoint meets blog meets email.
Make it an interactive standard and we might have something. Although, paper form idioms and GUI idioms do have some differences to iron out.
I've read about "Display PostScript", but it seems immature.
Okay, Oracle developed a CRUD-centric programming language and IDE roughly around the late 1980's. It used a relatively thin client "CRUD browser" for lack of a batter name that users downloaded which allowed them run multiple Oracle Forms (OF) applications.
The client ("browser") was pretty easy to install and upgrade, and applications developers could develop applications quite quickly using the Oracle Forms stack.
Then, about 15 years ago Oracle decided to discontinue their dedicated CRUD browser and use a Java-based version of the browser instead. The OF programming language and IDE is mostly the same, just the client implementation changed. THIS is what ruined a good thing. Managing client-side Java engine versions is a big corporate headache. Java applets failed, not OF itself. They should have continued with the dedicated CRUD browser.
I'm mostly talking about business CRUD applications. Nobody is going to do payroll on an iPhone. I don't know why you are bringing up time zones and color palates. Specific scenarios would help. Are you talking about internationalization? OF doesn't preclude such. And, I already agreed the results were not stylistically in fashion, but chasing fashion is not cheap.
The OF applications still work just fine at our org, minus the Java problems, per above.
That's a typo clarified in a later reply, I meant 7x as productive, such as coding 21 apps for every 3 the web-stacks produce.
Web browsers suck for that purpose. It would take a while to explain why.
I'm mostly talking about internal applications such that marketing aspects are not an issue. But humans do judge books by their cover and chase visual fashion fads, and that is indeed part of the problem, making us always start over instead of perfecting existing techniques and conventions. PHB's abound.
That's true, but education of newbies is kind of a different topic. By the way, Oracle used to give away a student kit for free, I believe. But just because a stack is easy for students and newbies to obtain doesn't make it productive in a normal corporate environment in the medium and long term.
And the good ideas of OF, Delphi, Powerbuilder etc. can be cloned in a generic sense and put into an OSS project. Most of their good ideas are not proprietary.
Where did I propose that? I'm not understanding what scenarios are playing
All because they run Linux instead of Windows.
My wife wants us to buy stock in Facebook because the stock is relatively cheap right now compared to its past. I told her there is too much of a chance it will turn into the next MySpace and dwindle, leaving stockholders holding the bag. Social media users have proven fickle. But if I turn out wrong down the road, she'll keep reminding me; it's a wife's God-given "job".
Multi-core bots are people too.
Hmm, 243 is Venus's rotation period. Coincidence?
Can I use it on telemarketers?
Corrections:
Re: "can crank out applications at about 1/7 the pace"
It should be "at 7 times the pace": 7 applications per 1 application from the web stacks. I should also clarify it doesn't really speed up the analysis side of things by 7 times, but because they can make an actual product faster than others make examples and prototypes, it does speed up the feedback cycle with customers to a degree. (Our web stacks could probably be simplified to some degree also, but our shop is stuck in habits. With a well-tuned web-stack, per fitting our org, the ratio would probably be 3-to-1.)
Re: "learn from the failure Java applets and Flash"
Should be: "learn from the failure of Java applets and Flash"
Histery Notzee!
Perhaps the phrasing could be tuned, but I read it as merely a warning that there is a sufficient possibility of it creating a run-away feedback cycle that would make life very difficult for humans. The probability of such is high enough that we should at least be on the alert.
Let's say half died. 50% of humans dying is not really "end of the world", but it is certainly catastrophic for humanity (at least). I didn't even see where they used "end of the world". One article uses the word "Apocalyptic". I don't know if "Apocalyptic" requires 100% to die or not. What percent have to die to qualify for "Apocalyptic"? 30%? 70%? 92.4927%? English is vague and lossy, headlines embellish, same as it ever was; I don't see a reason to get so "parsey" over non-specific words.
Should we not worry if there's a risk of half dying, but DO worry if all die?
Your biggest sin is accusing the jury AND me of various motivations using very poor evidence, that comes across as "your type always does/thinks X, therefore you are probably doing/thinking X here."
I not going to continue to debate somebody who fails at the basics. I shouldn't have let it get this far. I prefer logical rational people with clear lines of evidence. You are NOT one.
Most people who claim to be good at guessing motivations out loud are usually bozos.
By the way, the main purpose of "sanctuary cities" is so that illegal immigrants corporate with local law enforcement. If cops rat them out, they have no incentive to cooperate, and crime goes up. You should know that. You've probably heard that argument, but will say something like, "That's just an excuse to hide their REAL motivation of kissing up to illegals." Am I right?
I'm just saying the original post is misleading and leaves out important information. While not technically wrong, it is misleading, or at least poorly written.
It's a good thing the USA is making progress, BUT that doesn't excuse poor article quality.
What problem? Pointing out poorly-written articles is causing a problem? Call me a "rebel" then! I won't stop.
You mean your hallucinations. Take some courses in debate and logic, Your mind works improperly.
After dropping the ball 7 times they'll finally get it?
Are you saying the US has more coal plants, or factories, or what? Coal can be replaced by solar, wind, etc.
I do agree there are different ways to score, such as whether consuming items that pollute at foreign manufacturers should count against the producer or consumer. In my opinion, both parties are guilty and perhaps the demerit should be split between both.
The upside is it will be so obvious that Republicans cannot deny it's happening.
However, they'll probably blame it on Democrats somehow, maybe claiming that catering to LGBTQ made God angry, who then baked Earth as punishment. You think I'm joking, don't you?
May I see your Mind-Reader Certificate, please?
Again, both parties are, based on their history. I will agree that GOP's voting base is less likely to support it, but GOP politicians support it and ignore voters because business pays them Yuuuge bucks to allow illegals in. GOP can pull this off because they give it lip service while they are ignoring voters.
The direction doesn't matter much, for the USA is still a bigger "carbon pig" per capita than those countries. The fact your linked article failed to disclose that makes me reluctant to trust their objectivity, being it's a key metric when comparing countries.
I just find it better to focus on one topic at a time if it looks like it will be a long, drawn-out discussion. Otherwise, one is dealing with 2+ long drawn-out interweaving discussions.
But the reasoning of the jury is not. QED.
I could play the same game and say most red-state Fox/Rush media consumers are brainwashed such that they automatically assume that a vast majority of San Franciscans are heavily biased toward pro-illegal-immigration such that the jurors cannot make fair jury decisions.
Using this brainwash assumption, I could state that your automatic bias makes you unfit to apply Occam's Razor. QED2.
If you had statistical evidence that X do Y at Z% of the time, you may have a case. But "Hannity said so" is not statistical evidence.
After you admit you screwed up the first topic. Finish your plate before get you desert, young lady.
Your logic sucks eggs.
I intraduce tuns of spailing and grammer errers so that grammer notzees get to flustured too bothur too complane. Werks ulmost evry time.
1. Get your coders all drunk and stoned.
2. Pressure them to write lots of code.
3. Have testers find all the bugs.
4. Have the (now sober) coders plug their bugs with end-point logic, but not outright remove them.
5. Profit!