- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Sun turns Microsoft Windows server OEM
|
|
|
Comments (42)
22 earlier comments in the full thread.
>Stop this religious connotation nonsense man, even MS dropped it long time ago already.
Now Abe, you really must consider the context. I am not talking about FOSS being religious in nature. That's just silly.
The mono discussion of the last few days has been a strange mix of fact, reason, and who knows what. People who argue for choice any other time are asked why we need choice here. People brought up java, which, in my mind, should get tax-exempt status as a religious cult.
It is, of course, merely my opinion, but much -- not all -- of the discussion took on the tone of fearful fundamentalism -- clinging fearfully and irrationally to your dogma no matter what the facts may show, even to the point of losing faith with your god. And I say that as a person of faith.
In recent weeks, it has come out that even the revered Mother Theresa struggled with her faith, questioning the existence of God. That's what real faith is. If God is there, learning more will only get you closer to Him. If he's not, the faith is misplaced anyway.
Some people seem to have more faith in the power of Microsoft than in the power of free software. Those people should be buying tickets for the ClueTrain. If Microsoft could crush free software, it would have done so before now. Instead, free software is growing, growing, growing, while Microsoft is findint it's Vistas severely limited.
Now Abe, you really must consider the context. I am not talking about FOSS being religious in nature. That's just silly.
The mono discussion of the last few days has been a strange mix of fact, reason, and who knows what. People who argue for choice any other time are asked why we need choice here. People brought up java, which, in my mind, should get tax-exempt status as a religious cult.
It is, of course, merely my opinion, but much -- not all -- of the discussion took on the tone of fearful fundamentalism -- clinging fearfully and irrationally to your dogma no matter what the facts may show, even to the point of losing faith with your god. And I say that as a person of faith.
In recent weeks, it has come out that even the revered Mother Theresa struggled with her faith, questioning the existence of God. That's what real faith is. If God is there, learning more will only get you closer to Him. If he's not, the faith is misplaced anyway.
Some people seem to have more faith in the power of Microsoft than in the power of free software. Those people should be buying tickets for the ClueTrain. If Microsoft could crush free software, it would have done so before now. Instead, free software is growing, growing, growing, while Microsoft is findint it's Vistas severely limited.
Quoting:It is, of course, merely my opinion, but much -- not all -- of the discussion took on the tone of fearful fundamentalism -- clinging fearfully and irrationally to your dogma no matter what the facts may show, even to the point of losing faith with your god. And I say that as a person of faith.
There's just one problem. Not everyone (far from it) agrees with that opinion (I've even numerous times said I do not stand by my current position unchangingly), yet you act as if your opinion constitutes as a fact while formally saying that it is just your opinion. Because of that you find it OK to laugh and throw around questionable connotations at those you disagree with. Newsflash, there is more to world than Dinotrac.
@dinotrac
I don't know much about all that faith stuff (and Mother Teresa! Where was that from?) you said up there, don't really care.
But I think the problem with leaving things to faith (or fate) is that by the time, truth wins, there's someone else coming over the horizon to screw you over.
I would like to ask though? Why should Java get a tax exempt status of a religious cult? Just asking because maybe I am in the wrong business here. Feeds my family wonderfully though. Maybe you should open the doors to the infinite wisdom that you withhold that so many here are bereft of.
And no, just saying people who happen to be working in a company that uses Java as a technology are mindless corporate drones dosen't quite cut it for me. I get it, Java is old and Ruby is oh so cool and dandy, but still, I have yet to see a platform that can do 50% of what Java does (not trying to diss anyone here, but I really think so). Its about the targeted problem, not many many floats you can turn per second.
I don't know much about all that faith stuff (and Mother Teresa! Where was that from?) you said up there, don't really care.
But I think the problem with leaving things to faith (or fate) is that by the time, truth wins, there's someone else coming over the horizon to screw you over.
I would like to ask though? Why should Java get a tax exempt status of a religious cult? Just asking because maybe I am in the wrong business here. Feeds my family wonderfully though. Maybe you should open the doors to the infinite wisdom that you withhold that so many here are bereft of.
And no, just saying people who happen to be working in a company that uses Java as a technology are mindless corporate drones dosen't quite cut it for me. I get it, Java is old and Ruby is oh so cool and dandy, but still, I have yet to see a platform that can do 50% of what Java does (not trying to diss anyone here, but I really think so). Its about the targeted problem, not many many floats you can turn per second.
hchaudh1 -
Nobody needs to defend enterprise developers around here. I worked in Fortune 500 shops for years (heck -- Fortune 1 at one time) and nothing but the utmost respect for them. It's the bosses I wonder about.
>I think Java is an extremely good platform
And you could very well be right. The java projects I've seen have not impressed me, but I can be a tad harsh. You may have noticed!
Nobody needs to defend enterprise developers around here. I worked in Fortune 500 shops for years (heck -- Fortune 1 at one time) and nothing but the utmost respect for them. It's the bosses I wonder about.
>I think Java is an extremely good platform
And you could very well be right. The java projects I've seen have not impressed me, but I can be a tad harsh. You may have noticed!
>Why should Java get a tax exempt status of a religious cult? Just asking because maybe I am in the wrong business here.
It may be different where you work, but I've found that Java people seem to speak their own language. Really jarring sometimes. As a former lawyer, I still haven't gotten used to people discussing contracts in a development context. I've also noticed that Java tends to evangelize and creep and grow. We have java, therefore you should have java and all of our systems should have java. We should become a veritable information Starbucks.
At least the techs know what they're talking about. Some managers seem to think java is the corporate IT Messiah. Same thing for .Net where it's the preferred flavor.
Mind you, I say this all tongue in cheek. I am not and have but barely ever been a java developer. I am in no way qualified to make a technical assessment of java. Maybe my "love" for C++ (not the language so much as C++ gurus utterly determined to demonstrate their mastery of the magic) is spilling over. After all, applied technology is a combination of technical + human factors.
It may be different where you work, but I've found that Java people seem to speak their own language. Really jarring sometimes. As a former lawyer, I still haven't gotten used to people discussing contracts in a development context. I've also noticed that Java tends to evangelize and creep and grow. We have java, therefore you should have java and all of our systems should have java. We should become a veritable information Starbucks.
At least the techs know what they're talking about. Some managers seem to think java is the corporate IT Messiah. Same thing for .Net where it's the preferred flavor.
Mind you, I say this all tongue in cheek. I am not and have but barely ever been a java developer. I am in no way qualified to make a technical assessment of java. Maybe my "love" for C++ (not the language so much as C++ gurus utterly determined to demonstrate their mastery of the magic) is spilling over. After all, applied technology is a combination of technical + human factors.
> "Some of us", yes, not all of us.
You should note, Libervis, that I'm one of those people Dino targeted with his comments. Dino knows that I have absolutely no use for Mono or Moonlight. He also knows that I trust Microsoft as far as I can throw their headquarters. He probably even thinks I'm being irrational on the matter. He may even be correct. Not all decisions need to or should be made using logic and reason alone however. Microsoft is not to be trusted, and their olive branches are likely entwined with poison ivy. I don't need logic or reason to determine that, only knowledge of Microsoft's past history.
You should note, Libervis, that I'm one of those people Dino targeted with his comments. Dino knows that I have absolutely no use for Mono or Moonlight. He also knows that I trust Microsoft as far as I can throw their headquarters. He probably even thinks I'm being irrational on the matter. He may even be correct. Not all decisions need to or should be made using logic and reason alone however. Microsoft is not to be trusted, and their olive branches are likely entwined with poison ivy. I don't need logic or reason to determine that, only knowledge of Microsoft's past history.
>I don't need logic or reason to determine that, only knowledge of Microsoft's past history.
Ah ha!!! Smoked you out, you High Priest of anti-Billism!
Ah ha!!! Smoked you out, you High Priest of anti-Billism!
Quoting:That's uncalled for, Abe. Yes, Dino can be a bit caustic, but he doesn't deserve that, and tracyanne has been fairly civil in her disagreements. You should apologize.
No need for an apology, Dino and Tracyanne (I hope) know that wasn't a serious comment and I know better to be serious about it. But if it makes you feel better, I apologize.
Mind you, that doesn't make their arguments better or have any validity, in my opinion of course.
I think I agree with you on this. I have seen a lot of big company devs are not very competent. I think its more because usually these companies send their COBOL/Delphi programmers on a month long training and have this notion that suddenly they will be kick ass programmers, which is simply not true.
Mostly what I have noticed is that, in a team, there are a couple of good programmers which lead a few not so good programmers. I am not complaining as long as people follow certain guidelines and have code reviews. Legacy code is a different thing alltogether.
I think I know what you mean when you say "discussing contracts in a development context". I think its because with Java (as with any other FOSS platform), the choices are immense. Just look at the choices we have for XML parsing alone. And each comes with its pros and cons, development times, impact on further design etc. Its never as simple as, "I want to transform this XML file into this other format ASAP" which might be true for some other platforms. So yeah, while it sucks, its not that devs do this because they are incompetent or pushing an agenda. You lay out the choices with their respective weights and see what the client decides. It is easier on platforms where there is not much choice, or things are locked down tight, not so with Java or FOSS in general. Plus, another thing that bears on contracts a lot is the competency and knowledge of the dev team itself. If they are good in Java but not e.g. XSLT, do your transforms in Java (which takes time because XML parsing is not a native functionality of Java). But if you have a good XSLT guy on board, your dev times are cut down immensely.
And I know what you are talking about evangelizing a programming language. Techs will always do that. Look at the time spent on threads here or /. etc. That's why a good business team is essential to lock down the requirements, SLA's etc. A bad business analyst will screw the project and the team and I speak from experience.
Mostly what I have noticed is that, in a team, there are a couple of good programmers which lead a few not so good programmers. I am not complaining as long as people follow certain guidelines and have code reviews. Legacy code is a different thing alltogether.
I think I know what you mean when you say "discussing contracts in a development context". I think its because with Java (as with any other FOSS platform), the choices are immense. Just look at the choices we have for XML parsing alone. And each comes with its pros and cons, development times, impact on further design etc. Its never as simple as, "I want to transform this XML file into this other format ASAP" which might be true for some other platforms. So yeah, while it sucks, its not that devs do this because they are incompetent or pushing an agenda. You lay out the choices with their respective weights and see what the client decides. It is easier on platforms where there is not much choice, or things are locked down tight, not so with Java or FOSS in general. Plus, another thing that bears on contracts a lot is the competency and knowledge of the dev team itself. If they are good in Java but not e.g. XSLT, do your transforms in Java (which takes time because XML parsing is not a native functionality of Java). But if you have a good XSLT guy on board, your dev times are cut down immensely.
And I know what you are talking about evangelizing a programming language. Techs will always do that. Look at the time spent on threads here or /. etc. That's why a good business team is essential to lock down the requirements, SLA's etc. A bad business analyst will screw the project and the team and I speak from experience.
>But if it makes you feel better, I apologize.
You mean there AREN'T any checks coming in the mail?
Darn.
You mean there AREN'T any checks coming in the mail?
Darn.
> ...you High Priest of anti-Billism!
Only a lowly wayward follower, Dino. I've never aspired to the priesthood. :)
Only a lowly wayward follower, Dino. I've never aspired to the priesthood. :)
hc -
Very cool discussion. I only wish I were that smart. I was actually referring to contracts as in Design by Contract, which, upon further investigation, is not even a native java construct. Curses!!
Very cool discussion. I only wish I were that smart. I was actually referring to contracts as in Design by Contract, which, upon further investigation, is not even a native java construct. Curses!!
Aaahhh...ok. :-P
If you mean locking down the design before development starts, I don't think that is a problem with Java folks alone.
Yeah, it is a bit of a mixed bag. It makes sense sometimes considering that these big company projects usually deal with multiple systems and teams and design and SLA's have to be hashed out before any actual work can start. But as long as they don't dictate technology and coding practices and just stick to their interfaces etc., I am cool with that.
If you mean locking down the design before development starts, I don't think that is a problem with Java folks alone.
Yeah, it is a bit of a mixed bag. It makes sense sometimes considering that these big company projects usually deal with multiple systems and teams and design and SLA's have to be hashed out before any actual work can start. But as long as they don't dictate technology and coding practices and just stick to their interfaces etc., I am cool with that.
But I don't get why is that not a Java construct. Design by contract is the reason why we have interfaces and abstract classes etc.
Or maybe I am missing something big time here.
Or maybe I am missing something big time here.
>Only a lowly wayward follower, Dino. I've never aspired to the priesthood. :)
So modest today!!
So modest today!!
>But I don't get why is that not a Java construct. Design by contract is the reason why we have interfaces and abstract classes etc.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. That is not a construct unique to Java. As I understand (only after Googling), it originated in Eiffel.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. That is not a construct unique to Java. As I understand (only after Googling), it originated in Eiffel.
Quoting:You mean there AREN'T any checks coming in the mail?Nope, and you might as well forget about the sun tan you were going to get while at the conference in sunny Aruba.
>Nope, and you might as well forget about the sun tan you were going to get while at the conference in sunny Aruba.
I am SO depressed now.
I am SO depressed now.
Christ this thread has meandered on. I like the bit about the cheques, I'd actually like one or two for my advocacy of Linux, elsewhere.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
Given we don't work on cool, "Look mom, I am done with a blog generation software in 10 minutes" type apps. But a lot goes into running all those big old iron boxes with all their legacy code, wayyy too many interlinked systems and streams of data, disparate technologies and all of that.
I have met a lot of brilliant people in such settings and no, its not that they are all uncool, suit/tie wearing pointy haired types, just good coders who happen to work on a very different set of problems. OK, maybe not a lot, but still many are.
So, say what you may, I will always defend my enterprisey brethren (or sistern). BTW, I think Java is an extremely good platform (notice I said platform and not language).