Anyway, of late, software "improvements" have
too often been the exact opposite. What alien
universe do these 'improvers' COME from ???
IMHO, a lot of this is just "busy work" from
people looking for something to do. Their
idea of "better" means "better for ME - and
screw YOU". It's not better for the average,
or even professional, user.
Maybe we need a new branch ... Linux-2004 ...
with all the good stuff and none of these
"improvements" ??? Linux and related was
damned good from the start, SOLID by 2004.
It worked. It was kinda simple. You COULD
figure it out without committing suicide.
NOW, it just seems to be becoming an
incomprehensible ever-mutating MESS - Winders
by another name.
On 2025-02-08, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
Anyway, of late, software "improvements" have
too often been the exact opposite. What alien
universe do these 'improvers' COME from ???
IMHO, a lot of this is just "busy work" from
people looking for something to do. Their
idea of "better" means "better for ME - and
screw YOU". It's not better for the average,
or even professional, user.
Maybe we need a new branch ... Linux-2004 ...
with all the good stuff and none of these
"improvements" ??? Linux and related was
damned good from the start, SOLID by 2004.
It worked. It was kinda simple. You COULD
figure it out without committing suicide.
NOW, it just seems to be becoming an
incomprehensible ever-mutating MESS - Winders
by another name.
Much of the complexity that you do not approve of, seems to me to be
related to Linux's ambition to produce code that works on everything
from an embedded IoT device to a high-performance laptop to a clustered datacenter rack from a single set of source files.
Back "in the Golden Age", the spectrum of systems that the code was
expected to support was much narrower; that would tend to make the code
much simpler and more readable.
On 2025-02-08, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
Anyway, of late, software "improvements" have
too often been the exact opposite. What alien
universe do these 'improvers' COME from ???
IMHO, a lot of this is just "busy work" from
people looking for something to do. Their
idea of "better" means "better for ME - and
screw YOU". It's not better for the average,
or even professional, user.
Maybe we need a new branch ... Linux-2004 ...
with all the good stuff and none of these
"improvements" ??? Linux and related was
damned good from the start, SOLID by 2004.
It worked. It was kinda simple. You COULD
figure it out without committing suicide.
NOW, it just seems to be becoming an
incomprehensible ever-mutating MESS - Winders
by another name.
Much of the complexity that you do not approve of, seems to me to be
related to Linux's ambition to produce code that works on everything
from an embedded IoT device to a high-performance laptop to a clustered datacenter rack from a single set of source files.
Back "in the Golden Age", the spectrum of systems that the code was
expected to support was much narrower; that would tend to make the code
much simpler and more readable.
On 08/02/2025 18:57, Lars Poulsen wrote:
On 2025-02-08, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
Anyway, of late, software "improvements" have
too often been the exact opposite. What alien
universe do these 'improvers' COME from ???
IMHO, a lot of this is just "busy work" from
people looking for something to do. Their
idea of "better" means "better for ME - and
screw YOU". It's not better for the average,
or even professional, user.
Maybe we need a new branch ... Linux-2004 ...
with all the good stuff and none of these
"improvements" ??? Linux and related was
damned good from the start, SOLID by 2004.
It worked. It was kinda simple. You COULD
figure it out without committing suicide.
NOW, it just seems to be becoming an
incomprehensible ever-mutating MESS - Winders
by another name.
Much of the complexity that you do not approve of, seems to me to be
related to Linux's ambition to produce code that works on everything
from an embedded IoT device to a high-performance laptop to a clustered
datacenter rack from a single set of source files.
Back "in the Golden Age", the spectrum of systems that the code was
expected to support was much narrower; that would tend to make the code
much simpler and more readable.
Nah. Its the stupidity not of using an oriented *approach* to design
code, but of putting it into the frickin language and making everyone
use it.
On 2/8/25 2:31 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 08/02/2025 18:57, Lars Poulsen wrote:
On 2025-02-08, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
Anyway, of late, software "improvements" have
too often been the exact opposite. What alien
universe do these 'improvers' COME from ???
IMHO, a lot of this is just "busy work" from
people looking for something to do. Their
idea of "better" means "better for ME - and
screw YOU". It's not better for the average,
or even professional, user.
Maybe we need a new branch ... Linux-2004 ...
with all the good stuff and none of these
"improvements" ??? Linux and related was
damned good from the start, SOLID by 2004.
It worked. It was kinda simple. You COULD
figure it out without committing suicide.
NOW, it just seems to be becoming an
incomprehensible ever-mutating MESS - Winders
by another name.
Much of the complexity that you do not approve of, seems to me to be
related to Linux's ambition to produce code that works on everything
from an embedded IoT device to a high-performance laptop to a clustered
datacenter rack from a single set of source files.
Back "in the Golden Age", the spectrum of systems that the code was
expected to support was much narrower; that would tend to make the code
much simpler and more readable.
Nah. Its the stupidity not of using an oriented *approach* to design code, >> but of putting it into the frickin language and making everyone use it.
Well, I kind-of understand his issue. The problem these
days is SO-MANY-PLATFORMS. Developers, and esp their
pointy-haired bosses, want a one-fits-all application.
Alas this results in INSANE, un-debuggable, complexity.
Aiming for more narrow platforms is probably the better
way. The 90% required/functional code can be preserved,
but all the crap required to suit *a* platform can be
largely unique. Seems less-efficient, but is more solid.
But who cares about 'solid' these days ? Make something
arty and flashy, get the users cash - then ignore all
their complaints. It's a Business Model .....
Remember the "bad old days" when we had Atari, Apple,
Commodore, Tandy, TRS-80, ROM systems, CP/M, DOS ?
It was just not feasible to write an "everything"
application. A lot had to be customized to the
particular platform. This made for a number of
smaller, tuned, applications which WERE debuggable
and comprehensible. Today really isn't SO different,
but tends to be disguised - resulting in bloatware.
Well, I kind-of understand his issue. The problem these
days is SO-MANY-PLATFORMS. Developers, and esp their
pointy-haired bosses, want a one-fits-all application.
Alas this results in INSANE, un-debuggable, complexity.
Aiming for more narrow platforms is probably the better
way. The 90% required/functional code can be preserved,
but all the crap required to suit *a* platform can be
largely unique. Seems less-efficient, but is more solid.
But who cares about 'solid' these days ? Make something
arty and flashy, get the users cash - then ignore all
their complaints. It's a Business Model .....
Remember the "bad old days" when we had Atari, Apple,
Commodore, Tandy, TRS-80, ROM systems, CP/M, DOS ?
It was just not feasible to write an "everything"
application. A lot had to be customized to the
particular platform. This made for a number of
smaller, tuned, applications which WERE debuggable
and comprehensible. Today really isn't SO different,
but tends to be disguised - resulting in bloatware.
Simple is good! I struggle often to explain to young whipper snappers
the power of good enough. The power of good enough has won me a lot of business throughout the years.
I write data collection software. We have to handle data from all sorts
of different devices, some of which generate data whose format varies
only slightly from each other. Good luck talking the vendor into
changing his specs to something more standard (or, worst case, something
that is even syntactically correct). You can create a different program
for each layout, or you can write a front-end which resolves the
differences. At this point, designing code which can automatically
identify which format we're dealing with is a win, since it's one less configuration setting that the customer can get wrong (and one less
headache for the support people).
One of the wins we had when replacing a customers Azure was the
realization that they had no need for fancy fail-over, active/active
solution or even a DR-site, given the workload they are running.
That meant we could design our environment to be dead simple and avoid a
lot of complexity and keep the cost low.
On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 11:45:42 +0100, D wrote:
Simple is good! I struggle often to explain to young whipper snappers
the power of good enough. The power of good enough has won me a lot of
business throughout the years.
I've worked with a couple of programmers who tried to anticipate future
needs and developed complex code to handle those eventualities. 20 years later the eventualities never happened but the complexity is still there.
It's one thing to anticipate future needs in your design and not to paint yourself into a corner and another to spend a lot of time doing stuff
before it's necessary. Good enough is good enough.
On 09/02/2025 10:45, D wrote:
One of the wins we had when replacing a customers Azure was the realization >> that they had no need for fancy fail-over, active/active solution or even a >> DR-site, given the workload they are running.
That meant we could design our environment to be dead simple and avoid a
lot of complexity and keep the cost low.
A consultant once was asked to recommend a computer system for a small companies stock control
He said "you have paid me already, so I can be honest. Just buy a card file. It will be far cheaper and just as good".
I have friends who tell 'Alexa' what to put on their shopping list, I have a pad of paper and a pen by the fridge.
They take a mobile phone to the supermarket, I have a torn off sheet of paper...
Simple is good! I struggle often to explain to young whipper snappers
the power of good enough. The power of good enough has won me a lot of
business throughout the years.
I've worked with a couple of programmers who tried to anticipate future
needs and developed complex code to handle those eventualities. 20 years later the eventualities never happened but the complexity is still there.
It's one thing to anticipate future needs in your design and not to paint yourself into a corner and another to spend a lot of time doing stuff
before it's necessary. Good enough is good enough.
Sometimes when I'm in the mood for a challenge, I do not write it down,
but I simply remember the list. Works just as well.
That was a problem when I was reading Buddhism. Those people love
lists.Four Aryan Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination, and on and on.
I think Schopenhauer had list envy when he wrote 'On the Fourfold Root of
the Principle of Sufficient Reason'.
On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 22:50:12 +0100, D wrote:
Sometimes when I'm in the mood for a challenge, I do not write it down,
but I simply remember the list. Works just as well.
I've never been much of a list maker or note taker. When it was suggested
I bring a notebook to programming meetings I dutifully bought a pink Hello Kitty notebook. Nobody commented. I did use it for a few cryptic notes to
myself and for bug numbers. What I'm not good at is remembering numbers
like CS-37395,
That was a problem when I was reading Buddhism. Those people love
lists.Four Aryan Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination, and on and on.
I think Schopenhauer had list envy when he wrote 'On the Fourfold Root of
the Principle of Sufficient Reason'.
On 10/02/2025 07:50, rbowman wrote:
That was a problem when I was reading Buddhism. Those people loveBuddhists are very smart people.
lists.Four Aryan Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, the Twelve Links of
Dependent Origination, and on and on.
They probably invented the phrase 'bullshit baffles brains'
While the unenlightened are busy memorising the lists, the enlightened ones sit in the sun happy and content with their minds completely empty....not pestered by the ones busy memorising the lists...
I think Schopenhauer had list envy when he wrote 'On the Fourfold Root of
the Principle of Sufficient Reason'.
I always thought that was a bit of a circular argument, things exist because they need to exist to create the world in which they exist...
Taoism is much simpler. What is the Tao. The Tao is not anything . It just *is*.
The moment you introduce causality as a necessity, you end up with a worldview that needs a Prime Cause.
The secret is not to introduce universal causality as a necessity in the first place.
People are too fixated on finding the One True Viewpoint rather than accepting that all viewpoints are arbitrary, none are ultimately rue and some are more useful than others.
Buddhists understand that there are no true viewpoints and if you let go of all of them the world can be whatever you want it to be, subjectively. It just is, that's all. And it is way beyond what you make of it.
So relax. You have unravelled the mystery as far as you can, and it was all in your mind mostly. The closest you get to the truth is what you experience when your thinking mind is gone. Stopped.
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025, rbowman wrote:
On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 22:50:12 +0100, D wrote:
Sometimes when I'm in the mood for a challenge, I do not write it
down,
but I simply remember the list. Works just as well.
I've never been much of a list maker or note taker. When it was
suggested I bring a notebook to programming meetings I dutifully bought
a pink Hello Kitty notebook. Nobody commented. I did use it for a few
cryptic notes to
Very powerful, very cute! Did colleagues look strangely at you?
Buddhists understand that there are no true viewpoints and if you let go
of all of them the world can be whatever you want it to be,
subjectively. It just is, that's all. And it is way beyond what you make
of it.
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 12:09:58 +0100, D wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025, rbowman wrote:
On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 22:50:12 +0100, D wrote:
Sometimes when I'm in the mood for a challenge, I do not write it
down,
but I simply remember the list. Works just as well.
I've never been much of a list maker or note taker. When it was
suggested I bring a notebook to programming meetings I dutifully bought
a pink Hello Kitty notebook. Nobody commented. I did use it for a few
cryptic notes to
Very powerful, very cute! Did colleagues look strangely at you?
I am a programmer. My colleagues are programmers. Explain 'strange'.
Really? I thought it was only appropriate for sweden, but there you go.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvang,_California
Okay, so its Danish. Close enough.
There were snags. In the middle of a large project one of the client's
people came to view the progress. His reputation preceded him. Straight arrow, didn't drink, didn't chew, and didn't go with girls who do. The
sales department had a melt down. "What the hell are we going to do with him?"
Travel in those circles and you get the impression the country is run by
high functioning alcoholics.
On 2025-02-11, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
Really? I thought it was only appropriate for sweden, but there you go.
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 12:03:31 +0100, D wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvang,_California
Okay, so its Danish. Close enough.
Yup, 40 minutes drive from my house in Santa Barbara.
There were snags. In the middle of a large project one of the client's
people came to view the progress. His reputation preceded him. Straight
arrow, didn't drink, didn't chew, and didn't go with girls who do. The
sales department had a melt down. "What the hell are we going to do with
him?"
Travel in those circles and you get the impression the country is run by
high functioning alcoholics.
Do they still do that? I remember the movie depictions of the
"three-martini lunches" in the 1960s. Or the depiction of Charlie Wilson (R-TX) in "Charlie Wilson's War". But I never lived it. Except ...
When I worked in a Danish version of "3 guys in a garage", we decided we needed to boot revenue, so we hired an old-style salesguy. We knew he
was not really our kind of guy, but he had a reputation for success, so
we thought we'd try him out. It came to an abrupt end, when we sent him
to a trade show one city over, and learned that he had been ordering champagne to the sauna at the conference hotel to show off ... not to
the prospective customers, but to his old colleagues from his previous
job. Did not go over with his new boss.
We had a work culture where our lunch room had a fridge with cold beer,
and a tick-off sheet to mark what you took, and we'd settle at the end
of the month. And if you worked late, you charged your beers to the
company. No one argued about your travel expenses. "If I ever have to question your expense report, that will be your last day here. If I
can't trust you, I can't have you around." I've never seen that in
America.
On 2025-02-11, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
Really? I thought it was only appropriate for sweden, but there you
go.
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 12:03:31 +0100, D wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvang,_California
Okay, so its Danish. Close enough.
Yup, 40 minutes drive from my house in Santa Barbara.
Do they still do that? I remember the movie depictions of the
"three-martini lunches" in the 1960s. Or the depiction of Charlie Wilson (R-TX) in "Charlie Wilson's War". But I never lived it. Except ...
We had a work culture where our lunch room had a fridge with cold beer,
and a tick-off sheet to mark what you took, and we'd settle at the end
of the month. And if you worked late, you charged your beers to the
company. No one argued about your travel expenses. "If I ever have to question your expense report, that will be your last day here. If I
can't trust you, I can't have you around." I've never seen that in
America.
Trust is important. One of my new freelancers wasted 2 hours of my time
today bitching over his contract. The contract was 1.5 pages long.
A week before, my customer told me they thought he was unstructured,
grumpy and slow to respond. I thought they were just negotiating
(contract negotiating season coming up).
After todays call with him, I won't be renewing his contract with me.
Sometimes I do not understand people.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 26:01:29 |
| Calls: | 10,390 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 14,064 |
| Messages: | 6,417,039 |