The problem is that p eople who are willing to take this into account bid higher than those assuming that the users know what they want.
and half the users will want it in one place, the other half will want it in another, and a PHB thinks it's best in a third place...
Have iterations, yes, but a project can really be delayed if a project manager doesn't put manage expectations and suggest that interface issues should be change requests after delivery as to let users work on it for an extended period of time. By then, they will have a better idea of what they want, and effort won't be duplicated (and triplicated).
The more aunts and mothers using it, the more drivers that will be written.
The more, quicker and better drivers written for the OS, the better our experience is.
The more parents using the machine, the more kids that will be able to muck around with a good operating system with first class development utilities, and the more developers we'll have for the system, which will give us more and better utilities.
If there was any sanity in the open source desktop developer community, we'd see more effort going into GNUstep.
+1 funny... oh sorry, mod points used up.
I know I don't use it because I hate the space it takes up for those large icons. I like the central corner menu/"start button". I don't like all those boxes on the side taking away screen real estate. Perhaps when I have three monitors and can control them via keyboard.
The vertical, non-integrative menu makes accessing the menu options via keyboard a bit of a chore. Again, I think Windows (and gnome, fvwm, and kde) made the right choice in a horizontal menu at the top of the application. Perhaps I didn't spend enough time with it, but I couldn't find reasons to learn to love it, no matter what everyone else said.
Just because somebody once worked for a company which, after a change of management, went on to do bad things doesn't implicate them in any way in that.
Look here, buster. We're short on two minute hate subjects today and you're trying to defend a known villain?
No, I'm not the original poster but I'll continue...
That 45 minutes is a time where I have to keep concentrated on a task I don't enjoy. It's not as if I'm able to relax when driving lest I miss the grandmother of twenty-six stopped in front of me reading each individual sign to find the bingo club.
Driving is a state of alertness, and the only reprive is auditory media. Most of the radio stations are mediocre at best (though I have a community radio station in my city, it's uneven.) I'm not thrilled at buying auditory media I don't control (XM) and keeping it varied can either be an unproductive use of time searching for free music (legally!) or expensive, relying on an oligopoly as a gatekeeper.
Thinking idly? Well, that's not conducive to being alert while driving.
Do you want to skimp on the graphics to get the audio right?
Is it worth another extra million dollars for the sampling needed? Look at how expensive it is for movies to get the needed sound effects for only 1.5 hours of predictable "gameplay"... How about 100k?
Audio is largely a solved problem, at least to the level of animation movies... Games just don't have the budget that movies do.
It comes back to all computing decisions. We can do it well, fast, or cheap; pick any two and fast is one of your assumptions.
You do not need a CS degree to work in CS in many cases.
I have a CS minor. Some I work with dropped out of college.
Of course, I'm working as a programmer as an intermediate step, myself. If the right non-IT job came along, I'd still program but it would be back to being my hobby.
Because not only will you get to play with antiquated technology, (yeah... 2GB is antiquated now.) but you get not one but two slashdot articles out of it!
Just remember, you have all your time to avoid the slashdot effect, so you better have mirrors, boy. There ain't no excuse!
They may not be the owners of the software, but last I remember they'll enter consultancy contracts with anyone and they'll make it better if something's wrong.
How about individuals wanting source control on their at-home projects? I'm sure not going to spend the money on the MS control, but I don't have a *ix box up 24/7 either. (I use my laptop nearly exclusively, and my laptop hardware supports Windows better.)
Because it's not a s simple as X vs 2X computers. The chip, while significant, is not the total cost of the computer. Xeon 2x motherboards, for example, run 200 dollars less for equivalent Tyan MBs. (from looking at Newegg, anyway)
Because even if the chip is a significant portion of the cost of building the computer, it is only a small fraction of the total cost over the useful lifetime of the cluster.
Because one has to benchmark for one's own problem set. It's possible that one set of instructions are better optimized for Xeons.
Because the fewer number of nodes in a cluster, the more efficent each individual node is. A small performance increase may be substantial enough to require fewer nodes, bringing numbers into line.
Because if it's big enough, Intel might throw in a few days with an engineer to sweeten the deal. (But then again, so may AMD.)
Numbers arguments get too complex to make such an important decision a no-brainer.
We've used it... it's decent, though 1200 bucks IIRC.
A free version somewhat similar to this is Jasper Reports. The negative side is that documentation is severely lacking. (I'm seriously thinking of writing a book on it when this project is finished.)
Since you did mention Java already, I presume you're already comfortable with it.
There aren't too many "gods" out there. There is quite a bit of software to be made.
The bigger issue is that there are only a handful of people who have been programming professionally for more than a decade. People don't become gods overnight; I can program four to eight times more quickly than when I started programming professionally two years ago, for example. I am still learning (and relearning on occasion) tips and tricks daily. My officemate seems to have really become steady in his fifth year outside of college. (I classify him as pre-god -- he's really good)
People are having to write production code too quickly without strict review and bad habits are being learned. Younger programmers aren't getting necessary feedback (you certainly don't get the right kind of feedback in academia!) and people are moving to their second careers by the time they finally become useful.
1. Promise a driver RSN 2. Have laptop manufacturers place centrino chipset in otherwise solid offerings. Have previous offering (Pentium 4 mobile) burn the pants off people. Count on people not trusting that AMD's mobile product is not going to burn pants off people. 3. Tech-saavy users compromise on centrino product because of hope that they don't end up getting burned. 4. Profit!
That's why my laptop is a Centrino, anyway. I love it, even if I'm stuck with Windows. If I really need to run Linux at a later date, I'll turn off the internal card and get a PCMCIA wireless card.
I can see no logical reason why a platform should dictate what one teaches or practices in computer science.
One should be able to learn an MS operating system or a *IX system or a palm or AtheOS or...
I'm more concerned that they are familiar with a couple of languages out of a CS degree than I am that they can tell me what a wheel group is.
If it's an administrator, know a scripting language and XML. Know at least three operating systems, and be able to pick up an application in ten minutes because the boss is going to ask for a demonstration in 20.
It's not the pavement, though, but rather the close quarters. In animal experiments, the closer in you pack mice in over an intermediate or long term environment, the more agressive they become.
Pavement, being a way to develop infrastructure to drive people closer together, therefore is an indirect cause for violence.
The moral? Stop packing them in the inner cities, and keep CS players in their own rooms and talking on the net.
Why is it so foreign a concept that humans would prefer certain subsets of frequencies, dynamics, chord progressions, and so on?
If someone does end on the tonic, it's going to frustrate a piece, for example. It doesn't take a learned audience to notice this, but a trained audience will realize why the piece doesn't sound finished. (The tonic is the first note in the scale a piece is in.)
The blues is formulaic. It sticks to the same chord progressions. Rock sticks to a similar set of chord progressions.. This is because people found out that III-IV-VI-I, for example, sounds weird and uncomfortable. A I-IV-V-I is predictable, but it sounds pretty good none the less.
I can listen to Wilco, and hear the same underpinnings and assumptions to music as I will in the Beatles as I will in Britney. I prefer the instrumentation of Wilco, myself, but they all follow from the same set of instructions.
It's why Charles Ives will never be popular. It may be appreciated, I may love it, but I know it's going to be rough listening at times.
I am pretty sure that I could develop a similar algorithm for a trained human, taking just the principles outlined in classical music. I've thought of taking classical pieces and progressions and distilling them into pop music as an experiment. I know it would sell, because it follows the rules well.
The rules have already been established. The innovation here is being able to separate the frequencies in the wave and apply the rules.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that p eople who are willing to take this into account bid higher than those assuming that the users know what they want.
and half the users will want it in one place, the other half will want it in another, and a PHB thinks it's best in a third place...
Have iterations, yes, but a project can really be delayed if a project manager doesn't put manage expectations and suggest that interface issues should be change requests after delivery as to let users work on it for an extended period of time. By then, they will have a better idea of what they want, and effort won't be duplicated (and triplicated).
Simple.
The more aunts and mothers using it, the more drivers that will be written.
The more, quicker and better drivers written for the OS, the better our experience is.
The more parents using the machine, the more kids that will be able to muck around with a good operating system with first class development utilities, and the more developers we'll have for the system, which will give us more and better utilities.
Attach a shared printer, like Eric Raymond tried recently and wrote about in a rant.
or... how about trying to upgrade major applications that depends on libraries?
It's easy to use, so long as someone else is administering the machine.
If there was any sanity in the open source desktop developer community, we'd see more effort going into GNUstep.
+1 funny... oh sorry, mod points used up.
I know I don't use it because I hate the space it takes up for those large icons. I like the central corner menu/"start button". I don't like all those boxes on the side taking away screen real estate. Perhaps when I have three monitors and can control them via keyboard.
The vertical, non-integrative menu makes accessing the menu options via keyboard a bit of a chore. Again, I think Windows (and gnome, fvwm, and kde) made the right choice in a horizontal menu at the top of the application. Perhaps I didn't spend enough time with it, but I couldn't find reasons to learn to love it, no matter what everyone else said.
Just because somebody once worked for a company which, after a change of management, went on to do bad things doesn't implicate them in any way in that.
Look here, buster. We're short on two minute hate subjects today and you're trying to defend a known villain?
Silence!
No, I'm not the original poster but I'll continue...
That 45 minutes is a time where I have to keep concentrated on a task I don't enjoy. It's not as if I'm able to relax when driving lest I miss the grandmother of twenty-six stopped in front of me reading each individual sign to find the bingo club.
Driving is a state of alertness, and the only reprive is auditory media. Most of the radio stations are mediocre at best (though I have a community radio station in my city, it's uneven.) I'm not thrilled at buying auditory media I don't control (XM) and keeping it varied can either be an unproductive use of time searching for free music (legally!) or expensive, relying on an oligopoly as a gatekeeper.
Thinking idly? Well, that's not conducive to being alert while driving.
My solution was to move near my work.
Yes, but...
Do you want to skimp on the graphics to get the audio right?
Is it worth another extra million dollars for the sampling needed? Look at how expensive it is for movies to get the needed sound effects for only 1.5 hours of predictable "gameplay"... How about 100k?
Audio is largely a solved problem, at least to the level of animation movies... Games just don't have the budget that movies do.
It comes back to all computing decisions. We can do it well, fast, or cheap; pick any two and fast is one of your assumptions.
You do not need a CS degree to work in CS in many cases.
I have a CS minor. Some I work with dropped out of college.
Of course, I'm working as a programmer as an intermediate step, myself. If the right non-IT job came along, I'd still program but it would be back to being my hobby.
Because not only will you get to play with antiquated technology, (yeah... 2GB is antiquated now.) but you get not one but two slashdot articles out of it!
Just remember, you have all your time to avoid the slashdot effect, so you better have mirrors, boy. There ain't no excuse!
I think what you're looking for is Red Hat.
They may not be the owners of the software, but last I remember they'll enter consultancy contracts with anyone and they'll make it better if something's wrong.
Much of the copy protection testing happens in Europe, and a larger portion of copy-protected CDs are sold there.
Myself, I'd suggest expanding your horizons of music. There are plenty of legal sources of mp3s out there - they didn't all die with mp3.com.
How about individuals wanting source control on their at-home projects? I'm sure not going to spend the money on the MS control, but I don't have a *ix box up 24/7 either. (I use my laptop nearly exclusively, and my laptop hardware supports Windows better.)
Because it's not a s simple as X vs 2X computers. The chip, while significant, is not the total cost of the computer. Xeon 2x motherboards, for example, run 200 dollars less for equivalent Tyan MBs. (from looking at Newegg, anyway)
Because even if the chip is a significant portion of the cost of building the computer, it is only a small fraction of the total cost over the useful lifetime of the cluster.
Because one has to benchmark for one's own problem set. It's possible that one set of instructions are better optimized for Xeons.
Because the fewer number of nodes in a cluster, the more efficent each individual node is. A small performance increase may be substantial enough to require fewer nodes, bringing numbers into line.
Because if it's big enough, Intel might throw in a few days with an engineer to sweeten the deal. (But then again, so may AMD.)
Numbers arguments get too complex to make such an important decision a no-brainer.
Economists also theorize that people don't pay attention to the macroeconomic goals when there's no food on the table.
We've used it... it's decent, though 1200 bucks IIRC.
A free version somewhat similar to this is Jasper Reports. The negative side is that documentation is severely lacking. (I'm seriously thinking of writing a book on it when this project is finished.)
Since you did mention Java already, I presume you're already comfortable with it.
found at http://jasperreports.sourceforge.net/
Wait...
If SCO used Xenix to build Unixware...
then I have a copy of a (current) SCO project! Unix for the Tandy 6000, no less!
I feel vaguely queasy... but does that mean I have rights to use said intellectual property? Can I at least get a discount on the 700 bucks?
Reminds me of my last place...
We were in an apartment, and the computers were in two rooms side by side. The router was in my roomate's room, next to a phone jack.
We both had cellular phones, so we just opened up the wall jack and fed a cable through.
No, we didn't always have the best eye for aesthetics...
There aren't too many "gods" out there. There is quite a bit of software to be made.
The bigger issue is that there are only a handful of people who have been programming professionally for more than a decade. People don't become gods overnight; I can program four to eight times more quickly than when I started programming professionally two years ago, for example. I am still learning (and relearning on occasion) tips and tricks daily. My officemate seems to have really become steady in his fifth year outside of college. (I classify him as pre-god -- he's really good)
People are having to write production code too quickly without strict review and bad habits are being learned. Younger programmers aren't getting necessary feedback (you certainly don't get the right kind of feedback in academia!) and people are moving to their second careers by the time they finally become useful.
The problem isn't what they learn first.
1. Promise a driver RSN
2. Have laptop manufacturers place centrino chipset in otherwise solid offerings. Have previous offering (Pentium 4 mobile) burn the pants off people. Count on people not trusting that AMD's mobile product is not going to burn pants off people.
3. Tech-saavy users compromise on centrino product because of hope that they don't end up getting burned.
4. Profit!
That's why my laptop is a Centrino, anyway. I love it, even if I'm stuck with Windows. If I really need to run Linux at a later date, I'll turn off the internal card and get a PCMCIA wireless card.
:set ic is your friend.
grep -i is your god.
But your mistake is going straight to the publisher. Go to literary agents working in adolescent fiction.
http://hollylisle.com/fm/Articles/faqs3.html will give you a good start.
Well...
I happen to be gay, and the first thing I thought when I saw it was that I wanted a pic and a phone number...
If it's not gay, it's at least gay-friendly.
I can see no logical reason why a platform should dictate what one teaches or practices in computer science.
One should be able to learn an MS operating system or a *IX system or a palm or AtheOS or...
I'm more concerned that they are familiar with a couple of languages out of a CS degree than I am that they can tell me what a wheel group is.
If it's an administrator, know a scripting language and XML. Know at least three operating systems, and be able to pick up an application in ten minutes because the boss is going to ask for a demonstration in 20.
You know what?
You're close!
It's not the pavement, though, but rather the close quarters. In animal experiments, the closer in you pack mice in over an intermediate or long term environment, the more agressive they become.
Pavement, being a way to develop infrastructure to drive people closer together, therefore is an indirect cause for violence.
The moral? Stop packing them in the inner cities, and keep CS players in their own rooms and talking on the net.
Why is it so foreign a concept that humans would prefer certain subsets of frequencies, dynamics, chord progressions, and so on?
If someone does end on the tonic, it's going to frustrate a piece, for example. It doesn't take a learned audience to notice this, but a trained audience will realize why the piece doesn't sound finished. (The tonic is the first note in the scale a piece is in.)
The blues is formulaic. It sticks to the same chord progressions. Rock sticks to a similar set of chord progressions.. This is because people found out that III-IV-VI-I, for example, sounds weird and uncomfortable. A I-IV-V-I is predictable, but it sounds pretty good none the less.
I can listen to Wilco, and hear the same underpinnings and assumptions to music as I will in the Beatles as I will in Britney. I prefer the instrumentation of Wilco, myself, but they all follow from the same set of instructions.
It's why Charles Ives will never be popular. It may be appreciated, I may love it, but I know it's going to be rough listening at times.
I am pretty sure that I could develop a similar algorithm for a trained human, taking just the principles outlined in classical music. I've thought of taking classical pieces and progressions and distilling them into pop music as an experiment. I know it would sell, because it follows the rules well.
The rules have already been established. The innovation here is being able to separate the frequencies in the wave and apply the rules.