 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/08/2015 09:25 PM, Stephen wrote:
> And here is me thinking that you start with the clients requirements.
On the other hand... was it Ford?... Said something like "If I had
*asked* people what they wanted, they would have said 'faster horses'."
In my very limited experience, customers generally don't have the
vaguest clue what they want. (Other than "Everything. Yesterday.") They
most certainly have no idea what's easily achievable, and what will take
4 years of R&D. (Required XKCD quote: http://xkcd.com/1425/ )
This, of course, is why you're supposed to *discuss* stuff with the
customer, rather than just ask them to write it down...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/08/2015 09:13 PM, Stephen wrote:
> On 8/4/2015 5:54 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> (So... that sounds basically like what most people think about Haskell,
>> then!)
>
> No. Most people have not even heard of Haskell. And I am talking about
> IT managers and the coders that I've met.
So true! :'{
I did enjoy that time I told the guy at the top about Haskell.
"What's your favourite language then?"
"Haskell."
"OK. Why do you like it?"
"You remember that feature I implemented last year? That's about 300
lines of C++ code. But in Haskell, it's 10 lines of code."
"HOLY ****!! For real? Why aren't we using this stuff?!"
"Uh, because that would seriously decrease our bus factor?"
(I don't think he knows what a bus factor is. But anyway...)
>> I don't know, man... Where I work, trying to get hold of any definitive
>> kind of design specification is basically impossible, because the boss
>> can't be bothered to *think* about the actual implications of the
>> feature we wants. He expects us clever people to just "make it work".
>> Even if that's completely self-contradictory.
>
> Sack him.
>
> Your company really needs to change the way it operates. Don't rely on
> salesmen to write the nitty gritty requirements. That has to be done by
> collaboration with someone in the clients company and someone who knows
> you product, intimately.
Uh, can you actually sack the guy who founded the business?
I could rant on about his multiple failings, but at this point I'm
starting to believe that *every* business sounds like an episode of
Dilbert. Are there *any* commercial entities out there which actually
operate sanely?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> More realistically, MS would never take any decision that forced a
>> significant proportion of its user base to switch away from Windows.
>
> Except that with Windows 10, they may well have done that, what with the
> privacy issues that are starting to surface.
MS know that it's only a very small proportion of people who will worry
about that. I'm on several gaming forums and there are plenty of threads
about upgrading to Win10, privacy issues simply don't come up in the
discussions, and this is fairly tech savvy people who are upgrading,
rather than just buying a new PC from a shop. It's all about frame rates
(which actually seem much better in Win10 for some reason), hardware
compatibility and how to turn off the automatic updates (particularly
the automatic restarts).
> The problem is that there's no other platform that's as widely used, so
> most people will probably just accept those problems.
Indeed, MS would have to do something *really* wrong to get a
significant proportion of people to leave Windows.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/5/2015 8:15 AM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 04/08/2015 09:13 PM, Stephen wrote:
>>
>> Sack him.
>>
>> Your company really needs to change the way it operates. Don't rely on
>> salesmen to write the nitty gritty requirements. That has to be done by
>> collaboration with someone in the clients company and someone who knows
>> you product, intimately.
>
> Uh, can you actually sack the guy who founded the business?
>
It can be done if it is a public company but it is hard.
> I could rant on about his multiple failings, but at this point I'm
> starting to believe that *every* business sounds like an episode of
> Dilbert. Are there *any* commercial entities out there which actually
> operate sanely?
When it comes to IT, I doubt it.
Since starting working in SAP 20 years ago. I have worked at about 30
different companies. I no longer get depressed and just accept what is
company policy. No mater how much harder it makes the job.
The bar stewards have ground me down. :-(
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I hope that we can agree to disagree.
I rail against the "dumbing down" I see happening.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2015-08-05 03:15, Orchid Win7 v1 a écrit :
> On 04/08/2015 09:13 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> Your company really needs to change the way it operates. Don't rely on
>> salesmen to write the nitty gritty requirements. That has to be done by
>> collaboration with someone in the clients company and someone who knows
>> you product, intimately.
>
> Uh, can you actually sack the guy who founded the business?
>
Happens all the time. For example: Jobs got canned from Apple in the
late 80s. A company's founder is usually not a good executive, as
he/she will tend to micromanage things, since it's his/her baby, and
almost never a competent business person.
Once a company reaches a certain size, it should hire business people to
run the business side of things and keep the founder as head of R&D, or
CTO, or some similar job. This appeases the shareholders or investors,
as there are competent people running the company, and its vision is
retained.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 05 Aug 2015 10:07:28 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> I hope that we can agree to disagree.
>
> I rail against the "dumbing down" I see happening.
It is't "dumbing down" - it's designing so it isn't rocket science.
A fine distinction, but an important one. :)
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 05 Aug 2015 08:15:41 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> Are there *any* commercial entities out there which actually operate
> sanely?
Yes, but every commercial entity has its pockets of insanity - because
people are involved.
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 05 Aug 2015 08:17:52 +0100, scott wrote:
>>> More realistically, MS would never take any decision that forced a
>>> significant proportion of its user base to switch away from Windows.
>>
>> Except that with Windows 10, they may well have done that, what with
>> the privacy issues that are starting to surface.
>
> MS know that it's only a very small proportion of people who will worry
> about that. I'm on several gaming forums and there are plenty of threads
> about upgrading to Win10, privacy issues simply don't come up in the
> discussions, and this is fairly tech savvy people who are upgrading,
> rather than just buying a new PC from a shop. It's all about frame rates
> (which actually seem much better in Win10 for some reason), hardware
> compatibility and how to turn off the automatic updates (particularly
> the automatic restarts).
I think they hope that it's a small proportion.
I have a friend who knows someone at Microsoft involved in this - his
comment (the friend of a friend) basically was "we disclose pretty much
exactly what we do in the privacy policy - so I'm not sure what the
problem is. How do you provide services like the ones in Cortana
*without* gathering private information, and how do you disclose that
without it sounding Orwellian?" While I'm not a fan of Microsoft, he's
got a point. Google and Amazon also do the same thing, but there's no
significant outcry over what they're doing (though arguably, there is
some, particularly in Linux communities).
>> The problem is that there's no other platform that's as widely used, so
>> most people will probably just accept those problems.
>
> Indeed, MS would have to do something *really* wrong to get a
> significant proportion of people to leave Windows.
Yep. And they have Windows ME to compete with for that. And Bob.
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/5/2015 5:54 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Aug 2015 10:07:28 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> I hope that we can agree to disagree.
>>
>> I rail against the "dumbing down" I see happening.
>
> It is't "dumbing down" - it's designing so it isn't rocket science.
>
> A fine distinction, but an important one. :)
>
Shame that we can't agree.
--
Regards
Gramps
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
