4 ms·
"We have a strategy to promise that everything and anything provided that there is no firm specification or explanation and provided that we provide no date for
by raganwald 16y ago
"We have a strategy to promise that everything and anything provided that there is no firm specification or explanation and provided that we provide no date for implementation.
"This gives our customers a sense of security that if anything should happen to become important in the future, they will have purchased from a vendor that has a vision for embracing the technology even if there is no roadmap for actually implementing the technology.
"And although they may not ever end up benefitting from the technology, their careers are safe because they made a decision that, at the time, was prudent, namely to standardize on a technology that was thought to be on its way to becoming ubiquitous from a vendor that articulated a strategy for achieving ubiquity."
tl;dr: "F.U.D."
- cemerick 16y agoWhere is that from? That's not in my post, and not in the podcast transcript…
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- raganwald 16y agoOh? Gosh, I must have misread it. I admit I was in a hurry, and what he said sounded so much like what other proprietary enterprise vendors say when promising vaporware that I got the exact wording confused. UPDATE: Look, I am NOT making fun of your post in any way. I think it's fair game to poke a little at his comments given that there has been no other mention of this, no roadmap, nothing. But I respect your post and the fact that you pushed a little further and tried to find some corroboration for his statement. I'd like to think that somewhere in Oracle-land, there's a white paper from the Sun days talking about this idea, and maybe they're even trying to make it fly right now. And good job teasing that out and asking some intelligent questions about what it may mean.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- cemerick 16y agoI'm hardly an Oracle (née Sun in this context) booster; i.e. as a Clojure partisan, I'm all too aware of the benign neglect that comes with using the JVM but not Java, and with vaporware (JWebPane, anyone?). All that said, I'm happy enough to be Charlie Brown and take a run at this football. Cynicism leads to either resigning myself to using Javascript forever for client side stuff, something I just couldn't swallow psychologically.
- aaronblohowiak 16y agoWhy do you hate JavaScript so much? You can thoroughly ignore all notions of classes and use it as a lesser scheme.
- cemerick 16y agoJavascript is a bad language with poor libraries, and I'm forced to use it. I've said before: if it weren't for its distribution, it simply wouldn't be used. If given other choices (emphasis on the plural there), not one developer would opt for Javascript. "The good parts" of Javascript get a lot of play, but I don't want to have cope by using patterns and avoiding the dull, broken bits that go along for the ride...and I'm surprised that many (most?) other competent developers that wouldn't put up with such compromises in their "real" languages aren't as irritated about Javascript as I have been.
- martincmartin 16y agoHe's being sarcastic. He's paraphrasing.
- earl 16y agoI am aware of all internet traditions