SaraJo wrote:

I can dig it.

anand.t wrote:

What is the problem with some one recommending using c# in java?? If a programmer is going to come out of school and say he cant work in java because he did not learn it at school how many companies would be ready to take him.  The same vice versa. Study the concept at school be it using c++ or java or c# or small talk.

Remember, that couch get's a bit uncomfortable after a while.

ScanIAm wrote:



Someone discovered RMS

staceyw wrote:

IMO, the reverse is more true.  The *ix <-- croud needs to do the same.

Integer a = 10, b = 10 ;
Integer c = 129, d = 129 ;
System.out.println( a == 10 ) ; // A
System.out.println( a == b ) ; // B
System.out.println( c == 129 ) ; // C
System.out.println( c == d ) ; // D
 
> true
> true
> true
> false


Autoboxing Horror!

W3bbo wrote:

Kill your neowin RSS feed and subscribe to something less Microsoft orientated.

k2t0f12d wrote:



staceyw wrote: IMO, the reverse is more true.  The *ix <-- croud needs to do the same.

The very fact that there are so many UNIX-like operating systems, with derivations within each, that you have to identify them all with a generalization disproves your argument.

staceyw wrote:



IMO, the reverse is more true.  The *ix croud needs to do the same.  I eat oranges because I like them more then plums.  And I tell people why.  Does not mean plums are bad, and many probably prefer them, but that not not my concern.  Plus, oranges have a much richer ecosystem to eat in.

borosen wrote:



staceyw wrote:  IMO, the reverse is more true.  The *ix croud needs to do the same.  I eat oranges because I like them more then plums.  And I tell people why.  Does not mean plums are bad, and many probably prefer them, but that not not my concern.  Plus, oranges have a much richer ecosystem to eat in.

You might be right, I don't know, but how does that apply?

I have yet to understand how claiming that others are 'misbehaving' somehow justifies my 'misbehaving'.

Sven Groot wrote:

I still think C++ is a better language to teach at universities than Java or C#. I dread to think that there are students who finish their basic programming course and don't know what pointers are.

Rossj wrote:


Someone who doesn't know what pointers are but are using them unknowingly. Scarey thought.

zian wrote:

I'm not sure it's really worth discussing [language X] is better teach at universities for [such and such reason] because in my experience, universities tend to cover a lot of languages.

In my personal experience (1st year of college) at college, I've already done Java, Scheme, C, C++, and PowerPC assembly language.

Sabot wrote:

an alternative like Linux or Unix or Windows or OSX but I still have the sense of following some sort of hurd, if you catch my drift.

Sabot wrote:

Take for example the iPhone or even the iPod, what killer feature makes them head and shoulders above the competition?

Not one thing. Not even cheaper.

It's just cooler. Whatever that is? Sounds like plain older marketing to me.

Sabot wrote:

You have fallen into a common trap W3bbo.The iPod was successful because of marketing, not any killer features, and the same happening with the iPhone now.

I don't wish to have a product '(I need to watch my language) size' contest but the iPod has never been the biggest nor best before, during, or since in the MP3 market a bit of shopping about has always demonstrated that other brands with smaller marketing budgets have produced highly comparative products.

The 'iconic' interface started off life as a copy of another iconic interface the << >> > ll on the G1 and yet again it's evolution of whether subsequent revisions have been 'better' is very much a matter of opinion.

Apple are Lords of the advert, not innovation.

Rossj wrote:



Dave, if I didn't know better I'd be convinced you just make a UNIX joke. Follow the hurd indeed.

Rossj wrote:



Sabot wrote: an alternative like Linux or Unix or Windows or OSX but I still have the sense of following some sort of hurd, if you catch my drift.

Dave, if I didn't know better I'd be convinced you just make a UNIX joke. Follow the hurd indeed.

W3bbo wrote:


After all, since when did the Zune win any design awards?

W3bbo wrote:

Without naming names, I think it's worth pointing out there's a sight too many near-blind Microsoft bítches, people who seem to follow Microsoft as if it were the Christ. You know who you are.

W3bbo wrote:

You should stop ignoring the competition (from all angles be it ideological alternatives like GNU vs Permissive vs Propriety, or alternative implementations like FreeBSD or OSX).

W3bbo wrote:

For instance, those extolling the virtues of C# in education, whilst ignoring Java's advantages and other "real-world" problems where Java is best suited over C# (the CLR is not a strict superset of the JVM). You people are more advocational than Microsoft's own employees, even those of the NIH variety. Microsoft's own developers have said they use emacs or vim over VS; so how can you pímp VS like it's a panacea for any development ail. Different people have different requirements.

W3bbo wrote:

Kill your neowin RSS feed and subscribe to something less Microsoft orientated. MS is but one company in an ecosystem, why are you ignoring the other big players like IBM, Sun (they do more than Java y'know), and Oracle?

W3bbo wrote:

Ultimately you're hurting everyone you prosetylze, if you're successful in your evangelism then you're limiting your convert's employment propects. There are next to zero MS-only shops, it's in everyone's interest to become familiar with "foreign" technology. I already regret not getting to grips with Linux earlier on in life, for example.

W3bbo wrote:

Microsoft is a publically traded company, its loyalties are to the shareholders, not customers or partners. It just so happens that the
best way to please the shareholders is by making software good enough that it sells, not excellent or boutique software though. It's kind of like evolution via natural selection, changes are passed down only if the organism can reproduce succesfully, nothing else matters (so bachelor academics are dooming the human race whilst idiots reproduce like rabbits). Point is, there's very little incentive to create an "excellent" product, even less so when you already have a de-facto vertical monopoly with little competition in the same marketspace.

W3bbo wrote:

So tone it down. Recommend Microsoft or any other's products when appropiate, but consider Microsoft (and any other company/organisation/rag-tag team of hippies) is not perfect. Don't recommend one product with "two thumbs up" without judging it in cimparison to the competition. (So don't diss Java without using it for as long as you've been using the CLR, for example. Or Expression without trying Creative Suite.

I'd much rather have SD RAM based players. Price is decreasing, capacity increasing. It's a much smoother solution. You just plug in the SD RAM card and for changes, just insert it in the PC cardreader, well, at least until PC's have SD RAM readers built in.

These cards are great. They're extremely tough. Although one can only write to them a limited number of times, the same does not hold for reading.

Compare them to a CD. They could potentially be used to replace the CD - you could still download the music, but then write it onto SD RAM cards and insert them in a player for the stereo. It also means there is no direct dependence on having a PC running when you want to listen to music.

And better-than-CD quality is being realized through online record companies like Linn Records.

Chinmay007 wrote:

In fact it seems like there are more threads being made to dismiss something made by "the competition", then there is actual Microsoft content.

Chinmay007 wrote:

It's depressing and ignorant.

Chinmay007 wrote:

This is a Microsoft technology forum not an lets put down anything not made by Microsoft forum.

W3bbo wrote:

..Not that I'm an Apple fan,

anand.t wrote:


Hmm you praise apple and then say you are not a fanboy. Someone praises C# and they become a "bi*ch". Irony

Chinmay007 wrote:

 wkempf,

His point is that people here are overly dismissive of anything not made by Microsoft. In fact it seems like there are more threads being made to dismiss something made by "the competition", then there is actual Microsoft content. It's depressing and ignorant. This is a Microsoft technology forum not an lets put down anything not made by Microsoft forum.

Sabot wrote:

You have fallen into a common trap W3bbo.The iPod was successful because of marketing, not any killer features, and the same happening with the iPhone now.

...

Apple are Lords of the advert, not innovation. If they really are, I need convincing.

Sabot wrote:

Take for example the iPhone or even the iPod, what killer feature makes them head and shoulders above the competition?

glebd wrote:



Sabot wrote: Take for example the iPhone or even the iPod, what killer feature makes them head and shoulders above the competition?

Well, for me it's about good design, taste and functionality. And functionality doesn't necessarily mean cramping every conceivable feature into a piece of hardware or software. This is something Microsoft unfortunately doesn't get. (MS Office 2007, I suspect, is the first version of Office a proper designer had worked on.)

Chinmay007 wrote:

 PaoloM, wkempf:

Of course this isn't scientific or anything , but I'm seeing no problem finding negative posts on this forum and very hard time finding anything positive.

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=325204

Chinmay007 wrote:

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=325054

Chinmay007 wrote:

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=325199

Chinmay007 wrote:

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=325035

Chinmay007 wrote:

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=325031

Chinmay007 wrote:

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=323211

Chinmay007 wrote:

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=324685

Chinmay007 wrote:

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=325035

Chinmay007 wrote:

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=324420

Chinmay007 wrote:

That's just on the first two pages.

Now to compare Ubuntu Forums's Coffeehouse:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=499757
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=495840
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=500497
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=500958
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=431978

Yes so it has it's fair share of negative posts. Only one I noticed is for something other then Ubuntu (the PS3). Which is funny cause I thought Linux users are suppose to be really negative towards Windows.

Chinmay007 wrote:

 wkempf,

You are free to your opinion, but calling people like Rossj a troll is incredibly immature.

Chinmay007 wrote:



RoyalSchrubber wrote: Thank you for not making those URLs links. I am much happier when forced to ctrl+c & ctrl+v to death

That's funny, they look like links to me.

RoyalSchrubber wrote:



zian wrote: I'm not sure it's really worth discussing [language X] is better teach at universities for [such and such reason] because in my experience, universities tend to cover a lot of languages. In my personal experience (1st year of college) at college, I've already done Java, Scheme, C, C++, and PowerPC assembly language.

You have all those languages in 1st year? Which college? 

We only had Java & C first year. I've heard we are going to learn haskell next year.

Chinmay007 wrote:

 wkempf,

You are free to your opinion, but calling people like Rossj a troll is incredibly immature.

W3bbo wrote:



But lets not kid ourselves. A lot of contractors and other "code-monkeys" don't have formal education in computational science...

leeappdalecom wrote:



W3bbo wrote:  But lets not kid ourselves. A lot of contractors and other "code-monkeys" don't have formal education in computational science...

What is your problem with people who don't have a computer science degree?

leeappdalecom wrote:

What is your problem with people who don't have a computer science degree?

People like you make me sick, a comp sci degree has no bearing on how good a developer is.  I'm a contractor and I'm certainly no 'code-monkey', I don't have a comp sci degree but rarely do I come across another developer, even ones with 20+ years experience and masters degrees than can deliver an application or developer a business solution better than me.

I know theres 1000's of developers out there who ARE better than me but I doubt it has anything to do with the fact they have a poxy degree.

It comes down to how well you learn and how passionate you are about wat you do, anyone can do a degree when they leave school it's the way we are brought up to think that UNI is the only way to get get on in life, but it's nothing but snobbery from people like you.

You would probably be better of in a career in HR to be honest.

wkempf wrote:



Chinmay007 wrote:  wkempf, You are free to your opinion, but calling people like Rossj a troll is incredibly immature.

Ya know, I didn't call him a troll.  Go read what I said again.  I stand by what I said, and I believe the thread in question bears it out.  To be honest, I didn't check who started the thread when I followed your link.  Knowing other things he's posted here, I'm confident his intent was not to troll.  But the post itself was certainly of the caliber of many troll posts.  In this case, it's actually a frustrated rant,

k2t0f12d wrote:



leeappdalecom wrote: What is your problem with people who don't have a computer science degree? People like you make me sick, a comp sci degree has no bearing on how good a developer is.  I'm a contractor and I'm certainly no 'code-monkey', I don't have a comp sci degree but rarely do I come across another developer, even ones with 20+ years experience and masters degrees than can deliver an application or developer a business solution better than me. I know theres 1000's of developers out there who ARE better than me but I doubt it has anything to do with the fact they have a poxy degree. It comes down to how well you learn and how passionate you are about wat you do, anyone can do a degree when they leave school it's the way we are brought up to think that UNI is the only way to get get on in life, but it's nothing but snobbery from people like you. You would probably be better of in a career in HR to be honest.

I don't have a computer science degree.  I didn't feel singled out or offended  by W3bbo's post at all.

It may also be worth noting that over half of the academic staff at the CS department at Leiden University didn't have a CS degree. Lots of them were maths or other science majors.

leeappdalecom wrote:

I don't think it matters to be honest, I was just pissed of with the sweeping statement that contractors or code-monkeys without a CS or any degree for that matter are rubbish.

...

Oh well I won't go on about it just wanted to pull webbo up on it.

Rossj wrote:



leeappdalecom wrote: I don't think it matters to be honest, I was just pissed of with the sweeping statement that contractors or code-monkeys without a CS or any degree for that matter are rubbish. ... Oh well I won't go on about it just wanted to pull webbo up on it.

I totally agree with you, experience is oftentimes much more valuable than a piece of paper ... but W3bbo got the idea from somewhere, I am fairly sure he didn't come to that conclusion through a lot of thought and experience of people he knows - therefore it is a more general issue that needs to be addressed I think.  And don't forget, W3bbo wants a PhD, but I don't think he knows *why* he wants one other than to work in MSR.

Part of the problem is that you don't tend to hear a lot about self-taught doctors, or self-taught psychologists, and I assume people tend to take the same line of thought with computer programmers - where I believe it is not a valid comparison.

leeappdalecom wrote:



I belong to the BCS which certifies people as Chartered IT Professionals. Now I'm doing a part time degree for personal gain really and also to hold weight and gain Charterd IT professional status, but I would only have to work another 2-3 years to gain that anyway I reckon.

blowdart wrote:



leeappdalecom wrote:  I belong to the BCS which certifies people as Chartered IT Professionals. Now I'm doing a part time degree for personal gain really and also to hold weight and gain Charterd IT professional status, but I would only have to work another 2-3 years to gain that anyway I reckon.

Funny, I'm just waiting to get my CITP processed.

leeappdalecom wrote:



I take it you have a degree?

I was thinking of applying, but I have 8 years experience and some industry certifications. Got references that can account for my work in the field, but I'm not sure if I should wait for a bit and gain some more experience.

blowdart wrote:



leeappdalecom wrote:  I take it you have a degree? I was thinking of applying, but I have 8 years experience and some industry certifications. Got references that can account for my work in the field, but I'm not sure if I should wait for a bit and gain some more experience.

I thought everyone knew I don't have a degree.

You can do it on experience alone; but then, errr, I have 19 years experience.

leeappdalecom wrote:



Well you have ten years on me experience wise lol, I think ill wait a year or so and try to get more 'leader' type experience. Also want to gain a degree part time and get more MS certs.  All this while contracting, and running a small business and trying to get MS compentencies to become MS certified

There's just too much to do!

Rossj wrote:



wkempf wrote:  Chinmay007 wrote:  wkempf, You are free to your opinion, but calling people like Rossj a troll is incredibly immature. Ya know, I didn't call him a troll.  Go read what I said again.  I stand by what I said, and I believe the thread in question bears it out.  To be honest, I didn't check who started the thread when I followed your link.  Knowing other things he's posted here, I'm confident his intent was not to troll.  But the post itself was certainly of the caliber of many troll posts.  In this case, it's actually a frustrated rant,

Exactly true, frustrated rant trying to make a point about Windows being all things to all people, but put across so annoyingly badly (in my despair) that it turned into a bad thread - if, indeed, it didn't actually start out as one.

I post threads like that from time to time because I get incredibly frustrated with Windows and Microsoft, and C9 is the only outlet I have for that frustration where I would hope there are people to calm me down

Dr Herbie wrote:


So what exactly do you think you learned in your CS degree that us non-CS graduates don't know? Microchip architecture?  Compiler theory? Matrix algebra?  Which of these areas of advanced CS knowledge do you think the average developer needs?

Detroit Muscle wrote:



Dr Herbie wrote:  So what exactly do you think you learned in your CS degree that us non-CS graduates don't know? Microchip architecture?  Compiler theory? Matrix algebra?  Which of these areas of advanced CS knowledge do you think the average developer needs?

The formal training that separates engineers from programmers:

Detroit Muscle wrote:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_systems

Dr Herbie wrote:


That's not what I see as 'average developer' stuff -- to me the average developer writes business software

Sabot wrote:

Apple are Lords of the advert, not innovation. If they really are, I need convincing.

W3bbo wrote:

Without naming names, I think it's worth pointing out there's a sight too many near-blind Microsoft bítches, people who seem to follow Microsoft as if it were the Christ. You know who you are.

You should stop ignoring the competition (from all angles be it ideological alternatives like GNU vs Permissive vs Propriety, or alternative implementations like FreeBSD or OSX).

For instance, those extolling the virtues of C# in education, whilst ignoring Java's advantages and other "real-world" problems where Java is best suited over C# (the CLR is not a strict superset of the JVM). You people are more advocational than Microsoft's own employees, even those of the NIH variety. Microsoft's own developers have said they use emacs or vim over VS; so how can you pímp VS like it's a panacea for any development ail. Different people have different requirements.

Kill your neowin RSS feed and subscribe to something less Microsoft orientated. MS is but one company in an ecosystem, why are you ignoring the other big players like IBM, Sun (they do more than Java y'know), and Oracle?

Ultimately you're hurting everyone you prosetylze, if you're successful in your evangelism then you're limiting your convert's employment propects. There are next to zero MS-only shops, it's in everyone's interest to become familiar with "foreign" technology. I already regret not getting to grips with Linux earlier on in life, for example.

Microsoft is a publically traded company, its loyalties are to the shareholders, not customers or partners. It just so happens that the
best way to please the shareholders is by making software good enough that it sells, not excellent or boutique software though. It's kind of like evolution via natural selection, changes are passed down only if the organism can reproduce succesfully, nothing else matters (so bachelor academics are dooming the human race whilst idiots reproduce like rabbits). Point is, there's very little incentive to create an "excellent" product, even less so when you already have a de-facto vertical monopoly with little competition in the same marketspace.

So tone it down. Recommend Microsoft or any other's products when appropiate, but consider Microsoft (and any other company/organisation/rag-tag team of hippies) is not perfect. Don't recommend one product with "two thumbs up" without judging it in cimparison to the competition. (So don't diss Java without using it for as long as you've been using the CLR, for example. Or Expression without trying Creative Suite.

MB wrote:

No matter what specific technology you learn at University (or anywhere else for that matter) it will very quickly become out of date, and you then need to rely on underlaying skills to continue to educate yourself.

When I did Comp-Sci  I was taught using Fortran, Punch-Cards and frigging hard-copy debug listings... not much of which is of any use to me these days.

Bas wrote:



MB wrote: No matter what specific technology you learn at University (or anywhere else for that matter) it will very quickly become out of date, and you then need to rely on underlaying skills to continue to educate yourself. When I did Comp-Sci  I was taught using Fortran, Punch-Cards and frigging hard-copy debug listings... not much of which is of any use to me these days.

Yeah, but it didn't just teach you Fortran, punch-cards and hard-copy debug listings, it also taught you the underlying skills that transcend specific implementations, and which you need to keep your knowledge up to date.

Dylan C wrote:


XP and VB .NET 2.0 FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!

Java blows, my friend. I only use it becuase that's all my school teaches. It's the biggest waste; ever.

Microsoft for life!!!!!

Bas wrote:



Yeah, but it didn't just teach you Fortran, punch-cards and hard-copy debug listings, it also taught you the underlying skills that transcend specific implementations, and which you need to keep your knowledge up to date.

blowdart wrote:


Goggle has made for lazy, crap developers.

blowdart wrote:

Google has made for lazy, crap developers.

JChung2006 wrote:



blowdart wrote:  Bas wrote:  Yeah, but it didn't just teach you Fortran, punch-cards and hard-copy debug listings, it also taught you the underlying skills that transcend specific implementations, and which you need to keep your knowledge up to date. Very few universities seem to teach that now at all. Goggle has made for lazy, crap developers. Funnily enough I blogged on this last week.

What we need is a digg but for code snippets.  Hmm, I wonder if this is a gold nugget.

blowdart wrote:

If you read the blog entry then I think you're missing the point. That's exactly what the development community doesn't need.

What you're suggesting is totally unrealistic.  Turn off Google?  Yeah right, man.

I disagree with programming elitists like that guy you linked to in your blog and maybe you, too. We need to make coding easier, or more specifically, we need to make quality coding easier and more accessible, because -- guess what, pal? -- we need lots of good programmers, and we don't have them.

Take a look at the medical profession to see what you're proposing. There's a higher bar of entry to become a doctor. There's also a ridiculous shortage of good doctors in the world. So we can continue along as we are, or we could try to make medicine easier to practice so that we can try to lower the bar of entry without sacrificing quality.

Dr Herbie wrote:



leeappdalecom wrote:  W3bbo wrote:  But lets not kid ourselves. A lot of contractors and other "code-monkeys" don't have formal education in computational science... What is your problem with people who don't have a computer science degree?

I agree with leeappdalecom, W3bbo.
A computer science degree is not necessary to work as a developer.  In fact, only 10 years ago, I knew of some contracting companies that actively avoided CS graduates because "they can't program Windows".  My old employer Tessella, employs graduates in non-CS subjects because it's easier to teach a chemist to program than to teach a programmer about chemistry.

Dr Herbie wrote:

So what exactly do you think you learned in your CS degree that us non-CS graduates don't know? Microchip architecture?  Compiler theory? Matrix algebra?  Which of these areas of advanced CS knowledge do you think the average developer needs?

Dr Herbie wrote:

So W3bbo, I'll just put that remark down to "the arrogance of youth".  In fact, I'll put the whole post down under that heading because it was, in fact, pretty arrogant to tell people what stance to take on any subject.

Dr Herbie wrote:



leeappdalecom wrote:  W3bbo wrote:  But lets not kid ourselves. A lot of contractors and other "code-monkeys" don't have formal education in computational science... What is your problem with people who don't have a computer science degree?

I agree with leeappdalecom, W3bbo.
A computer science degree is not necessary to work as a developer.  In fact, only 10 years ago, I knew of some contracting companies that actively avoided CS graduates because "they can't program Windows".  My old employer Tessella, employs graduates in non-CS subjects because it's easier to teach a chemist to program than to teach a programmer about chemistry.

Dr Herbie wrote:

So what exactly do you think you learned in your CS degree that us non-CS graduates don't know? Microchip architecture?  Compiler theory? Matrix algebra?  Which of these areas of advanced CS knowledge do you think the average developer needs?

Dr Herbie wrote:

So W3bbo, I'll just put that remark down to "the arrogance of youth".  In fact, I'll put the whole post down under that heading because it was, in fact, pretty arrogant to tell people what stance to take on any subject.

JChung2006 wrote:



What you're suggesting is totally unrealistic.  Turn off Google?  Yeah right, man.

I disagree with programming elitists like that guy you linked to in your blog and maybe you, too. We need to make coding easier, or more specifically, we need to make quality coding easier and more accessible, because -- guess what, pal? -- we need lots of good programmers, and we don't have them.

JChung2006 wrote:



Take a look at the medical profession to see what you're proposing. There's a higher bar of entry to become a doctor. There's also a ridiculous shortage of good doctors in the world. So we can continue along as we are, or we could try to make medicine easier to practice so that we can try to lower the bar of entry without sacrificing quality.

JChung2006 wrote:

Take a look at the medical profession to see what you're proposing. There's a higher bar of entry to become a doctor. There's also a ridiculous shortage of good doctors in the world. So we can continue along as we are, or we could try to make medicine easier to practice so that we can try to lower the bar of entry without sacrificing quality.

W3bbo wrote:

Uhm, but by lowering entrance requirements, you're also reducing standards.

So you're okay with there being a shortage of doctors/good programmers because there's no concerted effort to make the profession easier to practice, whether it be medicine or software development.

And, no, I'm not talking about making it easier for anyone to become a doctor by lowering standards.  I'm talking about fundamentally changing the way medicine is practiced so that you don't have to be "the best of the best" to be competent at it.

JChung2006 wrote:



W3bbo wrote: Uhm, but by lowering entrance requirements, you're also reducing standards.

So you're okay with there being a shortage of doctors/good programmers because there's no concerted effort to make the profession easier to practice, whether it be medicine or software development.

blowdart wrote:

It's not the bar of entry that's the problem, it's the qualification at the end of it. And for most "developers" there isn't any way to prove they're competant (and no a degree doesn't prove this). The medical profession should be rigourous, but more importantly it proves a means to strike off and ban bad doctors. Bad developers just get another contract.

JChung2006 wrote:


There is.  It's called malpractice.  Unfortunately, malpractice is driving good doctors away from the profession, along with the bad, because it is making it financially less feasible to continue to practice medicine.  It's a reason why medicine is so damned expensive coincidentally.  It's one of those "barriers of entry" I'm talking about.

he medical profession should be rigourous, but more importantly it provides a means to strike off and ban bad doctors

blowdart wrote:

In my view you're approaching it wrongly.

By simplifying the profession you are not raising quality, you're simply making it easier for bad doctors/developers to practice.

You shouldn't concentrate on making the profession easier, you should concentrate on making the entrants better.

blowdart wrote:

Word error;

he medical profession should be rigourous, but more importantly it provides a means to strike off and ban bad doctors

And no, malpractice is not why medicine is so expensive. Vexious malpractice suits are one of the reasons (in the US anyway).

JChung2006 wrote:


Making a profession easier to practice makes the practitioners better.  Simplifying a task makes it less prone to error.  The more complicated a task is, the more likely you will screw it up, no matter how good you are.

blowdart wrote:

 And having google doesn't produce them. It's not elitist at all; freely available information doesn't help when people do not think or evaluate if the first 3 hits on google are in fact any good or applicable to their situation. I'd disagree we need lots of good programmers; we need more good programmers, and code monkeys that take advice. The outsourcing projects I've worked with have all failed because advice was never taken. Heck I've seen bad code justifed by pointing to someone's blog articles (not mine obviously, my code articles are stunning *grin*)

Patterns illustrate this really well, I've seen too many people go pattern happy, pushing their code into patterns because they don't *think*, they just do as they believe they're told.

Turning google off would be wonderful; but it isn't going to happen. It's a shame the solution is to teach people to think; that doesn't seen to happen any more either.

blowdart wrote:



JChung2006 wrote:  Making a profession easier to practice makes the practitioners better.  Simplifying a task makes it less prone to error.  The more complicated a task is, the more likely you will screw it up, no matter how good you are.

Except at the end of the day programming really isn't hard. The hard stuff is the design and thought around it; the integration with business needs, scalability, and so on. Things that cannot be taught out of books or followed by recipes. In the same way that medicine is not about "you have symptom X you are suffering from Y", it cannot truly be simplified in that sort of way.

Code monkey work on the other hand might be easily simplified, except the amount of *bad* advice on google has already put paid to that.

JChung2006 wrote:

Freely available information being used improperly is just a wrong-headed excuse to want to turn it off. It's a rather insidious form of censorship if you think about it.

JChung2006 wrote:

You disagree that we need lots of good programmers, and then in the same breath you say that we need more good programmers. Umm, so do you actually disagree, or are you just being disagreeable, because I disagree with you?

JChung2006 wrote:

I agree that it would be better if people thought more. I think it would be more pragmatic to eliminate the necessity of thought on tasks that are really simple enough not to require much of it. Make it as simple as possible but not too simple.

JChung2006 wrote:

We need better software development tools so that we can focus our thoughts on the actual problems and not the plumbing. We need more prescriptive software development guidance. We need a better way to share code than copy-pasting source from Google, one that is peer-reviewed (hence my digg reference).

JChung2006 wrote:

How do you propose to guarantee quality without requiring some sort of certification?  I'm dying to know!

Mark Brown wrote:

What's this thread about again?

I got lost between the first post and these latest ones

wkempf wrote:

Can't agree. Programming is NOT easy, and not for those not dedicated and with some apptitude.

W3bbo wrote:



"Development" is what software engineers do, it invovles architectures, good design, and building things from the ground up. And of course, a solid understanding of what you're doing.

W3bbo wrote:

whilst practically anyone could do civil engineering using nothing more than on-the-job training, a formal education embodies that person with a lot more knowledge that can be applied in many ways.

Rossj wrote:



W3bbo wrote: whilst practically anyone could do civil engineering using nothing more than on-the-job training, a formal education embodies that person with a lot more knowledge that can be applied in many ways.

The thing is, on the job training is going to show someone what they need to know, a formal education is going to focus on some things that someone may never again use in their entire life.

1. I learnt Z at University, and whilst it was just a grounding in formal methods, I have in the last 10 years used exactly 0 formal methods exactly 0 times.

2. I learnt about the web/internet on the job (partly because it wasn't really taught at Uni when I was there), and I learnt what I needed to know to do the job which involved lots of RFCs and lots of trial and error and learning from my own mistakes.

Which of the above (both true) facts makes me more valuable to an employer?

Chinmay007 wrote:



University is suppose to concentrate on theory, I think - which is something pretty difficult to get with experience. To be really successful with computers, you need both.

Having a University degree is not a panacea. You don't walk in a fresh faced teen and walk out three years later as a magic programming guru, faultless to a tee and dispensing wisdom with every sentence.

That's not to say they aren't a good idea. They do (generally) challenge you to think for yourself. It does expose you to formal methods and other techniques that you might otherwise not encounter. Even if you never actually use all the things you learn, the experience you do gain can alter your perspective and allow you to take a wider view in future.

The average fresh-faced graduate, to be blunt, is probably a mediocre coder at best, because CS is about much more then coding. Only real-world experience can teach you the difference between the ivory tower of academic theory and the harsh reality of getting things done. That doesn't make the theory useless, neither does it prevent a self-taught individual from rising to an equal standing.

Ultimately passion for the subject, a desire to learn, and the pride in your work that makes you constantly strive to improve is what singles out the really good individuals.

Of course, I'm biased. I have a degree and work for a Uni. My code is sloppy and poorly commented. But it mostly works.

blowdart wrote:

Interesting timing, Hope University in liverpool (ha, hope in Liverpool) announced a .net degree a couple of weeks back.

AndyC wrote:



blowdart wrote: Interesting timing, Hope University in liverpool (ha, hope in Liverpool) announced a .net degree a couple of weeks back.

/me mumbles something about polytechnics and real universities

blowdart wrote:


Hey, are you saying my OU degree will be worthless?

AndyC wrote:


Er, or something.

blowdart wrote:


So wet haddock in the face time at the next DDD?