Whoever interviews, he asks very good and interesting questions.
Keep up the good work. One of the most interesting interviews (the series of interviews) I have seen recently.
rasx wrote:The web is taking over all applications that can be designed with a simple, input-postback state machine. As of this writing, web applications cannot maintain complex state---and I say this in view of the Outlook 2003 Web Client and the tangled conceptual mess that is SharePoint Portal Server.
The web application begins to fail when it begins to feel like a time-consuming, sequential "wizard" (which happens quite a bit in SharePoint interfaces). The rich client is clearly superior where the web application begins to fail.
But history teaches us that organizations can cheat and lower the bar of what a professional, enterprise application is and when this happens the web will take "all" application development.
I mostly agree but also somewhat disagree on certain points.
Certainly windows forms has certain advantages, but the design of the sharepoint also helps people to focus on the current task they are completing. So web interfaces might be in fact superior because of their simplicity and sequential wizard style.
I dont know if you've ever programmed in flash, but the reason flash isnt good enough for the apps he mentions is down to the Scripting language, not what you actually see.
From my experience flash is a horrible tool to code in, good for animations, but awful for complex logic.
you are right, flash is not the right tool, but there is something called flex, on top of flash. I don't know much about it, but from what I understood it is flash for programmers, rather than designers.
Thanks a lot, a very cool video.
I don't know if my post prompted this interview, but if it did, thanks one more time.
Woman in general won't work long hours in front of the computer is just not right
Why? Is there a scientific evidence that shows that they are as likely as males to sit in front of a computer and type computer code? Of course there are guys who will not do the same, but in my experience women tend to stay away from such tasks. They are more social than males.
The point is not that women can not do it, the point is that they don't seem to be interested in doing that.
If there are any barriers, sure, let's find them and torn them down. But what if the barrier is the female feelings and nature? In my education, I found girls to be much better at social classes than men, like writing, language etc... Those who were good at sciences, math and so on tend to select more social jobs, like being a doctor. However, I did have girl friends in my computer science school, they were all successfull, but they were fewer compared to males. I haven't seen a barrier you can torn down, there was nothing in my career that says women are not welcome or anything like that.
The only barrier I can think of is sitting in front of a computer and programming for long hours which nobody likes to do. It is the satisfaction at the end that keeps us there. That satisfaction has been with me since very young ages, like when I was a child. I loved to program computers and I was willing to sit in front of a computer for 6-7 hours just to hear a noise or make computer do an animation and I was so excited about it that it didn't matter if the computer would lost everything once I had to close it, that one-two minute of seeing computer doing something that I wanted it to do was simply worth 6-7 hours. When I talk about this to my girl friend, she never understood me at all, but when I talk to my male friends, most of them did show some interest in what I was doing and they seem to understand what I am talking about. I don't see many women going around and telling how they are proud of sitting in front of a computer and programming something. More males seem to be crazy about that satisfaction of making computers do something, wheras women seem to be less interested in. This is based my own experience on the web, on my personal life and on others' personal lives.
If you can find a way to torn this down, then that's just great. However, trying to look for barriers that are not there may create problems for everybody. What they are doing makes sense, but overall I personally don't expect a big difference unless universities mandate some sort of quota for women. In that case, it would be an artificial increase and will likely hurt both men and women.
Her last statement didn't make sense to me though. She said these new programs will help universities to recruit more women and minorities. That doesn't make sense, because throughout the conversation she focused on how to get more women on computer science programs, at the end she mentioned the minorities. Miniroty men are not women.
Frankly, it is a mistake to recruit more women for the sake of it. I wish there were more women, but what I have seen is that, they are less likely to work in front of a computer like males for long hours. I guess it is against their nature. Artificially increasing women participation may work against the women themselves, maybe you are encouraging them in the wrong career.
Some kick * video. Very cool.