Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Single case anecdote. (Score 1) 188

by Chris Mattern (#49632927) Attached to: Why Was Linux the Kernel That Succeeded?

I'll believe Linux will disappear like Sun and DEC did when somebody answers the question, "How do you make it cheaper than free?"

Maybe somebody will. Maybe we'll all fall for letting the corp record all our transactions to pay for it all. But until someone definitively answers that question, Linux isn't going anywhere.

Comment: Re:Snowball effect (Score 2) 188

by Chris Mattern (#49632833) Attached to: Why Was Linux the Kernel That Succeeded?

- Red Hat, Novell etc on the software front.

Backwards. Linux wasn't successful because Red Hat and Novell got behind it. Red Hat and Novell got behind Linux because it was successful. Red Hat was founded *after* the Linux kernel was first written and didn't become a big corporation until 8-10 years after Linux's first release. Linux grew Red Hat, not the other way around. Novell got seriously involved in pushing Linux even later.

Comment: Re:Measurements (Score 1) 408

by lgw (#49624203) Attached to: The Programming Talent Myth

So which one is a "software development engineer"? It's all the same job, modulo seniority. Banging out code is the core of it, to be sure, but it's not what most of us spend our time doing, unless you throw in "design" and "testing" into "programming" - which is fine, but then we're back into people skills being part of it.

Comment: Re:Defense of the Article (Score 1) 408

by Chris Mattern (#49621135) Attached to: The Programming Talent Myth

In order for it to be truly bimodal, people have to start in either camp A or camp B and end in the same camp they started in. Because if you transition from one to another over time, any point in time will capture a group of people in between the modes.

Bimodal doesn't mean there is *nobody* between camp A and camp B. It means there are *very few* between camp A and camp B.

Comment: Re:Measurements (Score 3, Insightful) 408

by lgw (#49619867) Attached to: The Programming Talent Myth

Further, he's perpetrating the myth that the most talented programmers "drive away others, but you have to put up with them", which falls outside the definition of "talented" that most people would accept. Sure, you do very rarely hear about that cliche - the guy who you only give solo projects, but he's hyper-productive - but that's maybe 1 in 1000?

The truth is, for most companies with full-career technical tracks and VP-equivalent top technical pay grades, the more senior you are, the less you code (though hopefully it never goes to zero), and the larger the organization you must have technical influence over. Since you have to build that influence yourself through a combination of leadership skills and writing code everyone uses, you'll never make it if you "drive people away".

OTOH, you don't belong in this industry if you take code reviews personally. Every day the compiler will call you illegal, invalid, and wrong, and you co-workers might say the same about your code in CR. If you start taking that as personal criticism, you're not going to last. We're not writing opinion pieces here.

Comment: Re:At the same time (Score 1) 300

For example, conventional wisdom from authorities was that the Spitfire was completely impractical because... you had to turn the plane to aim it at the target, as there were no gun turrets.

Buh? At the time of the Spitfire's development, fixed forward firing guns were the *standard* on all fighter aircraft, that design feature having become universal fairly early on in World War One.

We cannot command nature except by obeying her. -- Sir Francis Bacon