Listen. I've spent far too many of my working years dealing with companies that have caught religion of some sort. It doesn't matter which one it is, be it ISO, CMMI, Six Sigma or some virulent form of agile (yes SCRUM people, I'm talking to you); its a religion. Instead of focusing on the business and developing sound processes that fit the business model and the company culture these companies put in place this huge infrastructure hoping that this will make them automatically successful.

It doesn't.

It does kill whatever passion there is though. Yes that goes for agile too but in other parts of the company than the one you might be sitting in.

These days I have a good rule that works - when a company tries to sell me services based on being CMMI level 5 I tell them to far, far away and preferably perform some acts that are illegal in several states. After having dealt with a couple of them I have realized that the only genuine thing generated is a huge paper trail and innovation is dead or dying.

As to your question - I don't know and I don't care. I can only make the friendly suggestion that you look for work in a place that doesn't focus on religious adherence to principles defined elsewhere. I promise you that it'll be more fun, challenging and ultimately interesting.

Hundreds of millions of monkeys are watching other monkeys chasing a ball on TV. And deriving pleasure from it presumably.

once someone has bothered jailbreaking it. Prior to that - no chance of me spending my cash on it as my interest in feeding Mr Murdoch and his ideas is exactly zero.

It's an interesting step. I think we will see devices down the line (add cameras, eye tracking and general inventiveness) that come close to a cut down version of Neal Stephenson's "Diamond Age" ideas. But right now it's nowhere near that. Just an interesting piece of hardware that I can use as a glorified screen/reader/remote. Which is pretty much what I will do. If someone hacks the damn thing.

I absolutely see where this would be useful but it's just another concept that can alleviate some of the burdens of certain parts of our (?) work. For coding, all out, no-holds-barred, i-need-to-get-this-out-of-head coding you need something that is structured around packages and classes/interfaces. Whether you have to create it yourself or you started with UML (you fancy person you) or a whiteboard doesn't matter. You want to write the code, test cases and move on. I am a believer in making mistakes and correcting them rather than overanalyzing at the beginning and that has worked well in all sorts of environments, whether it has been carrier grade telecom stuff or enterprise widget work. Doesn't matter. Get an initial design, hammer in the functionality and iterate. However, in that type of scenario Code Bubbles doesn't really help. Where it does help is in debugging and documenting, I can certainly see how this would be enormously useful in that situation. The problem is that you don't normally shift between IDEs that way. Some do, I don't and even though I don't necessarily kill the people working for me if they do it, it adds a lot of maintenance overhead to deal with dual project structures.

Anyway, if this ever gets into IntelliJ I'll be happy clam I think.

Why? To reduce cost and stay competetive in a highly price sensitive market? I'm pretty sure they knew exactly why they did it.

Your point being that you have a problem with software versions above 10 or?

Oh no. Poor dead author and his unknowable intentions.

Why is this important? Come on. If the books are crap then don't read them. They won't be chasing you
home from the store.

Nontroversy.

But seriously, this argument is wholly inane and false.

1: IE6 - it would break intranet sites. NO it wouldn't as it wouldn't get used unless the proper meta tag is IN THE PAGE. Is this insanely hard to understand? IE6 would keep chugging along until a page that asked nicely for the plugin came around. Then it would be used. The intranet would remain untouched.

2: IE7 - upgrade to IE8. Do you have any idea of how many organisations are avoiding upgrading to IE8 specifically because they aren't sure that everything is going to work properly. You are arguing that they have to upgrade (to a product that is measurably worse than the competition at handling new, javascript-heavy web applications) rather than take advantage of a plugin that will solve their immediate pain point (performance for certain apps) while not disturbing their current setup.

3: Veiled attempt at tricking users into using Chrome instead of legitimately gaining marketshare.
Please, enlighten me - exactly how does one "legitimately gain marketshare"? This is just plain old stupid. Market share is built by providing a good product and having people use it. Time will tell if Chrome Frames is a good product and if people will use it. You are not the judge of what is a legitimate route to market or not. Sorry. The arbiter of that is the market.

Ummm. Not many users? Do you completely fail to comprehend how HARD Google could push this on IE6/7 users if they wanted to? And with their allies and partners I think they would have a very good chance of doing an 80-20 conversion on that user base. That's what's up for grabs, not the measly IE8 percentage points. IE6 and IE7 users accessing Youtube, google.com, gmail, google docs et al being gently pushed to install the plugin. Good thing too in my opinion. The sooner we can get that crap out the door and onto the crap heap of history the better for everyone.

1: The major reason for voicemail and related services (slamdown notifications where you get a text message stating that someone called you but didn't leave a message) are NOT the minutes you spend but rather call completion. You see, calls that don't terminate when your terminal is not online (a not uncommon occurance in crap networks like the US ones, you would not believe how much time a normal handset in a metropolitan area is offline) are a loss since you don't get missed call information. There is a very, VERY well understod business case for voicemail services and how they affect the average revenue per user.

2: What customers SHOULD do is require that all operators allow them to connect to Google Voice type services, i.e. a service provider that will let them govern the way they receive information and control the modus in which they respond themselves.

3: The charging model of US operators is completely insane compared to the rest of the world. How the hell can you put up with it? Seriously?