Why is it hard? Too many people have influence in the process. Put one person in charge who will (1) actively be involved in the project and (2) have final say on decisions. No committees, no one-off directives from politicians or bosses who don't know the day-to-day details, no approval process. Just one guy calling the shots. A lot of people will be disappointed because it doesn't do X, Y or Z, or because it uses platform P instead of platform Q, but the project will be completed and will serve its purpose.
Lobster was absolutely in this category. When my grandmother was a child in the 30's 40's, families hard up for food would collect lobsters that washed up on shore. After eating, they would bury the shells in their yard to prevent neighbors from seeing or smelling the evidence in garbage cans, such was the embarrassment of eating lobster.
Software is no longer written using the waterfall approach...
Speak for yourself.
You agile folk like to claim that "requirements will always change, so let's plan for it and embrace it." Bullshit. Requirements only change when (1) people don't plan properly, and (2) developer and project managers cater to the whims of clients without charging what they should for change orders. If I hire an engineering firm to build a commercial building, I can't expect to keep changing the requirements after I sign off on the spec, the way people seem to think they can when they hire a software developer. The change order charges would be exorbitant, because with every change a traditional engineer will properly re-evaluate the plan from the ground up and adjust the infrastructure as necessary.
There's a joke out there about what would happen if structural engineers built structures the way software developers build software. I don't remember the exact punch line, but it doesn't take much imagination to realize that it's along the lines of "no one would dare use bridges or enter commercial buildings out of fear that they would fail." It's funny because it's true. We've set such low standards for software reliability that there is now an entire development methodology that advocates (and attempts to justify) a lack of planning and QC only of completed work, rather than QC'ing design plans BEFORE we waste time building something that may or may not pass QC.
Apologies for the rant, but the whole agile mindset just pisses me off.
Why should they? OSS devs aren't a group of altruistic folks just waiting around to fulfill arbitrary feature requests from end users. They, like the rest of us, need some incentive to implement a new feature. If a dev on the project finds your proposed feature useful, or sees it as an interesting technical challenge, or has some other (possibly financial) incentive to implement it, then he'll listen. Otherwise it's up to you to either implement it yourself or hire someone to do so.
It's not sane people that avoid OSS; it's the people who expect a typical customer/vendor relationship with a software publisher who are turned off by (or just don't realize) the fact that OSS doesn't work quite the same way.
I'm not old enough to scream "get off my damn lawn," yet I find the phrase years ago disturbingly incongruous with the practice of Googling a name using a wireless network.
It's not like that at all. Hiring a carpenter would be analogous to hiring a developer to write a custom web browser for you. If that were the case, then yes, customers would have reason to gripe. But Google's response is more like a cabinet manufacturer that offers its wares on the open market (a la Lowe's, Home Depot, etc.). Customers can gripe all they want, but if it's not a bespoke job then you have to choose from what's available.
Even in a free market economy, consumer choice among vendors is limited to those vendors who choose to enter the market.
Spam boss: Hey Johnson, how are you coming on those replies to this morning's penis enlargement campaign?
Johnson: Making progress boss. Only 200,000 more replies left to read.
Spam boss: Great work Johnson.
Johnson: Hey boss?
Spam boss: Yeah Johnson?
Johnson: I think you should take a look at this reply from amiga3D...
Spam boss: Hmm... [reads email from Johnson's computer screen to self]
Spam boss: Well, sheeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiit, Jonhson, this guy is really unhappy with us. Son of a gun.
Johnson: What should I do, boss?
Spam boss: Take him off all our lists IMMEDIATELY! Have operations cancel the campaign that's going out right now and the two in the queue until we can be sure he's on on those lists. Forward his email to customer service and have them reply with an apology, and offer him a coupon for 25% off of a spam campaign. We'd better nip this in the bud before this guy makes makes his complaints public -- our reputation depends on on it!
Johnson: Of course, boss! Right away!
No, it's presumption of unpreparedness and naivety. The people who want to stick around believe they are knowledgeable about the risks and have mitigated them, while the government telling them to leave wants to avoid sending out emergency responders in case the people are wrong (in legitimate concern for emergency responders' safety).
Perfect analogy. New Englanders scoff when they close roads in Virginia for a couple inches of snow, but it's necessary because they don't have the infrastructure to deal with it. This is no different.
Most people don't voluntarily pay more sales tax, but plenty of us run, jog, hike and join gyms for the explicit purpose of expending more energy that we otherwise would.
Well, I can buy a 50 pound bag of rice locally for about $40. According to the nutrition label, it provides 170 kcal (711 kJ) per 45 grams, working out to 15.8 kJ per gram. That's about $0.00011 per kJ.
I pay, on average, about $0.15 per kWh for grid electricity in the Northeastern US. That's about $0.000042 per kJ, an order of magnitude cheaper than my rice.
To summarize the parent link, some current student begins his review by praising Cooley's liberal admissions policy and explaining that Cooley will take you if no one else will. He goes on to complain that the grading system is severe, A's and B's are "hard to come by", and the school flunks out students in their first, second, or third year. "To stay afloat and not flunk is difficult once you get accepted," he complains.
Well, damn. The kid finally found a law school to accept his mediocre ass, and now he's complaining because the academic standards aren't as lax as the admission standards. IT'S LAW SCHOOL, kid. I think he might be better suited to a community college.
DHS doesn't specify any lock. They define standards that manufacturers can choose to implement if they want to market a standards-compliant lock. FTFA:
Zurich-based Kaba markets the 5800 lock... as the first to integrate code-based access controls with a new [DHS] standard
Software is written once, but it is executed many times. Spend the extra money on up-front costs (people) and you'll save on recurring costs down the line.
AC's point is about the foolish equation of "researcher at University of Washington" with "rich engineer, silver spoon and business connections". A university researcher is not necessarily an engineer, and both research and engineering positions are well within the bounds of middle class in the western world. The kid may well have advantages in the tech field over the concession-stand dad, but a silver spoon is not one of them.
I'm quite skeptical of people who draw a hard line between the two. It suggests that the person doesn't truly enjoy what they do, that it's just a means of income. There's nothing wrong with that in general (we all need to eat), but from the client/colleague/investor/employer perspective it's a real put off.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is it hard? Too many people have influence in the process. Put one person in charge who will (1) actively be involved in the project and (2) have final say on decisions. No committees, no one-off directives from politicians or bosses who don't know the day-to-day details, no approval process. Just one guy calling the shots. A lot of people will be disappointed because it doesn't do X, Y or Z, or because it uses platform P instead of platform Q, but the project will be completed and will serve its purpose.
Lobster was absolutely in this category. When my grandmother was a child in the 30's 40's, families hard up for food would collect lobsters that washed up on shore. After eating, they would bury the shells in their yard to prevent neighbors from seeing or smelling the evidence in garbage cans, such was the embarrassment of eating lobster.
Software is no longer written using the waterfall approach...
Speak for yourself.
You agile folk like to claim that "requirements will always change, so let's plan for it and embrace it." Bullshit. Requirements only change when (1) people don't plan properly, and (2) developer and project managers cater to the whims of clients without charging what they should for change orders. If I hire an engineering firm to build a commercial building, I can't expect to keep changing the requirements after I sign off on the spec, the way people seem to think they can when they hire a software developer. The change order charges would be exorbitant, because with every change a traditional engineer will properly re-evaluate the plan from the ground up and adjust the infrastructure as necessary.
There's a joke out there about what would happen if structural engineers built structures the way software developers build software. I don't remember the exact punch line, but it doesn't take much imagination to realize that it's along the lines of "no one would dare use bridges or enter commercial buildings out of fear that they would fail." It's funny because it's true. We've set such low standards for software reliability that there is now an entire development methodology that advocates (and attempts to justify) a lack of planning and QC only of completed work, rather than QC'ing design plans BEFORE we waste time building something that may or may not pass QC.
Apologies for the rant, but the whole agile mindset just pisses me off.
No one listens to feature requests
Why should they? OSS devs aren't a group of altruistic folks just waiting around to fulfill arbitrary feature requests from end users. They, like the rest of us, need some incentive to implement a new feature. If a dev on the project finds your proposed feature useful, or sees it as an interesting technical challenge, or has some other (possibly financial) incentive to implement it, then he'll listen. Otherwise it's up to you to either implement it yourself or hire someone to do so.
It's not sane people that avoid OSS; it's the people who expect a typical customer/vendor relationship with a software publisher who are turned off by (or just don't realize) the fact that OSS doesn't work quite the same way.
I'm not old enough to scream "get off my damn lawn," yet I find the phrase years ago disturbingly incongruous with the practice of Googling a name using a wireless network.
probably for most people I know even more ubiquitous than mini/micro-USB
FTFY
Nor do artists who "draw" pictures always pull their writing implement. Language evolves and words take on more general definitions.
It's not like that at all. Hiring a carpenter would be analogous to hiring a developer to write a custom web browser for you. If that were the case, then yes, customers would have reason to gripe. But Google's response is more like a cabinet manufacturer that offers its wares on the open market (a la Lowe's, Home Depot, etc.). Customers can gripe all they want, but if it's not a bespoke job then you have to choose from what's available.
Even in a free market economy, consumer choice among vendors is limited to those vendors who choose to enter the market.
Surround your house with plastic wrap and duct tape.
Spam boss: Hey Johnson, how are you coming on those replies to this morning's penis enlargement campaign?
Johnson: Making progress boss. Only 200,000 more replies left to read.
Spam boss: Great work Johnson.
Johnson: Hey boss?
Spam boss: Yeah Johnson?
Johnson: I think you should take a look at this reply from amiga3D...
Spam boss: Hmm... [reads email from Johnson's computer screen to self]
Spam boss: Well, sheeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiit, Jonhson, this guy is really unhappy with us. Son of a gun.
Johnson: What should I do, boss?
Spam boss: Take him off all our lists IMMEDIATELY! Have operations cancel the campaign that's going out right now and the two in the queue until we can be sure he's on on those lists. Forward his email to customer service and have them reply with an apology, and offer him a coupon for 25% off of a spam campaign. We'd better nip this in the bud before this guy makes makes his complaints public -- our reputation depends on on it!
Johnson: Of course, boss! Right away!
It's harming natural selection
No, it's presumption of unpreparedness and naivety. The people who want to stick around believe they are knowledgeable about the risks and have mitigated them, while the government telling them to leave wants to avoid sending out emergency responders in case the people are wrong (in legitimate concern for emergency responders' safety).
You can out politics and look straight at the media. Where do they live? New York, the center of the world.
Perfect analogy. New Englanders scoff when they close roads in Virginia for a couple inches of snow, but it's necessary because they don't have the infrastructure to deal with it. This is no different.
...because as we all know, property is more valuable than life and limb.
Most people don't voluntarily pay more sales tax, but plenty of us run, jog, hike and join gyms for the explicit purpose of expending more energy that we otherwise would.
Well, I can buy a 50 pound bag of rice locally for about $40. According to the nutrition label, it provides 170 kcal (711 kJ) per 45 grams, working out to 15.8 kJ per gram. That's about $0.00011 per kJ.
I pay, on average, about $0.15 per kWh for grid electricity in the Northeastern US. That's about $0.000042 per kJ, an order of magnitude cheaper than my rice.
Your...
I've been patiently waiting since 1999
You're impressions of Windows are outdated. It has been a stable OS since XP was released.
WTF?
To summarize the parent link, some current student begins his review by praising Cooley's liberal admissions policy and explaining that Cooley will take you if no one else will. He goes on to complain that the grading system is severe, A's and B's are "hard to come by", and the school flunks out students in their first, second, or third year. "To stay afloat and not flunk is difficult once you get accepted," he complains.
Well, damn. The kid finally found a law school to accept his mediocre ass, and now he's complaining because the academic standards aren't as lax as the admission standards. IT'S LAW SCHOOL, kid. I think he might be better suited to a community college.
Zurich-based Kaba markets the 5800 lock... as the first to integrate code-based access controls with a new [DHS] standard
Software is written once, but it is executed many times. Spend the extra money on up-front costs (people) and you'll save on recurring costs down the line.
AC's point is about the foolish equation of "researcher at University of Washington" with "rich engineer, silver spoon and business connections". A university researcher is not necessarily an engineer, and both research and engineering positions are well within the bounds of middle class in the western world. The kid may well have advantages in the tech field over the concession-stand dad, but a silver spoon is not one of them.
I'm quite skeptical of people who draw a hard line between the two. It suggests that the person doesn't truly enjoy what they do, that it's just a means of income. There's nothing wrong with that in general (we all need to eat), but from the client/colleague/investor/employer perspective it's a real put off.
Income is nice, too, if you want to keep shipping. Chrome will only fetch a limited amount it.