Tamerlin

32 ms·

241.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
It's also false. Examples: DirectX -- nVidia and ATI implement Direct3D in hardware, not the other way around .NET -- C# and F# are leading language development in many ways (not all) XNA -- games for Zune, PC's, Windows Mobile, XBox from o
242.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
I partially agree. The thing is that under Jobs, Apple has really just been a consumer electronics company with a nice OS under its umbrella. Apple tried to buy its way into Hollywood, and failed (losing badly to Linux because the visual ef
243.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
That depends on how narrowly you interpret "this way" in reality. Apple has a LONG history of shooting customers in the back: -- oh, your brand new monitor isn't compatible with your brand new computer -- that you just purchased from an App
244.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
I appreciate the link.
245.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
Apple has always behaved this way. The only reasons that they got away with it was a combination of cultist loyalty and being the underdog. Apple has always been considerably more evil than Microsoft.
246.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
It's not entirely inappropriate when you consider how the economics work. Most people who use computers really don't do much beyond browsing the web, reading e-mail, and balancing their checkbooks. Ergo, they consume content and use web app
247.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
Maybe they were jealous because people were buying Pulse rather than their own app ;)
248.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
"Even as a fan of Mac products I think Steve Jobs gets too much credit." I couldn't agree more. Jobs epitomizes everything that so many of us detest about big companies, so I have to wonder why anyone here actually likes or even respects hi
249.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
Or the political machinations of lousy management. Not to mention the typical bait and switch that most tech companies pull on talented staff, as was my experience at amazon (which as far as I can tell is the rule there): Job description: d
250.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
I agree with the "should" part also. Experience says that "HR" and "competence" go together approximately as well as "military" and "intelligence" however.
251.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
Isn't some form of competence a prerequisite for having a core competency?
252.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
"I wish these companies well in retaining their hires." I suspect that they aren't very good at that, and are counting on the fact that most of the companies that they would like to hire people from aren't very good at it, either. Even if t
253.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
So you're basically saying that if the founder(s) have to do actual work in order to maintain profitability than it's not a company? I should also point out that there are quite a few successful photography photography studios that not only
254.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
What does that have to do with anything? Successful photo studios can be quite profitable businesses, generating quite a bit of income.
255.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
Professional photography is a lot like consulting. The differences are that you can't hid bad photography like you can hide bad code, and once you're established, you can charge higher rates than you can as a software consultant. (I'm alrea
256.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
"On the other hand, I sometimes get the impression (I am primarily viewing this as a teacher of elementary age pupils) that persons with talents in the sciences ARE ignored (at early school age) even though they will be valuable to business
257.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
Well, if the organization putting out RFP's took the contractors' track records into account when awarding contracts, they'd end up eliminating a lot of this corruption. Instead, the fact that the big contractors routinely run FAR over budg
258.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
Microsoft has a long history of bending over backwards for developers, even going so far as to put one-off patches in its own libraries to fix bugs in 3rd party applications.
259.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
You're right. They're limiting themselves to the bottom of the barrel in web developers, and setting up their schedule around the standard malpractices that lead to the deplorable state of the current IT systems in the first place. The idea
260.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
That also helps with the materials issue. The moon has a lot of metals that would be useful for such a mission.
261.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
True, but commercially speaking they're the minority.
262.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
Dropping the "computer" part from the name was probably a bit of foreshadowing...
263.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
They do, and I don't think that's going to change, because Microsoft has a team of developers whose job is to write the software that they use to write software.
264.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
One reason that Apple is able to so much with such a small R&D investment is that Apple doesn't develop much technology. As an example on the other end of the spectrum, Intel develops a LOT of technology -- though a lot of that R&D,
265.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
Actually it's entirely true. Ruby allows VASTLY inferior programmers to program. Java and C++ set slightly higher bars; at least with them you have to reach inferior, as opposed to vastly inferior, in order to make stuff work.
266.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
"You're confused. Rubyists didn't sink your project. Bad programming (and management) did. They would have fucked up the project in Java or Haskell or Perl or anything else." I'm not confused at all. Rubyists sunk the project, plain and sim
267.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
So YOU'RE the one! :)
268.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
My first Ruby programming experience was with a company sunk by Rubyists, their asinine architecture, and constant monkey-patching. Rubyists most certainly DO hang themselves with monkeypatching, quite often. You just don't tend to hear abo
269.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
I'm considering one for use as a portfolio, and for reading while traveling (if it turns out that it's possible to charge it with solar power, it might even go on the list of backpacking luxury items, to serve as a book, journal, and possib
270.
by Tamerlin 16y ago
The compensation should have been skewed the other way. The founders had proven themselves, the CEO had not. Ergo, the salaries should have worked the other way around. Besides, the founders were hiring the CEO; his job was to work FOR THEM

More ›