Search Results

Search found 787 results on 32 pages for 'budget'.

Page 22/32 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

  • ASP.NET calendar drawing control

    - by BCS
    I want to make a simple ASP.NET page that draws a months from a calendar and highlights given dates. (I'm not looking for a date picker.) What I have is a list of DateTime values and I need to display them a a nice way. Given that I'm a total beginner with ASP, simpler really is better. (I'd rather not, I'm willing to hack together something with StringBuilder and <table> if it's easier). p.s. I have no budget, so non-free controls will only be of use to other readers.

    Read the article

  • .NET user interface components recommendations

    - by Parakus
    I'm looking for advice on what .NET user interface components are out there on the market. I have been developing asp.net websites and have mainly been using the Visual studio toolbox build in controls supported by the AjaxcontrolToolkit and the applications have been mainly used inhouse running on our company intranet. But now a new client wants a much more professional looking, commercial web application and they have a budget for some user components for use in the application. Any recommendations where value for money will be realised. Interested in components that will integrate well with ASP.NET 3.5 SP1 or even .NET 4.

    Read the article

  • What should I ask a prospective client during initial meeting?

    - by Anna Lear
    I'm about to branch out into taking on some contracts on the side. What would be some good questions to ask of a potential client during a first meeting? I've thought of a few things that seem pretty obvious: * What is the project? * What are the deadlines? * What's the budget? * What/how do they want me to deliver the completed work? Is that it, or are there any tricky things to watch out for?

    Read the article

  • Cheapest ways to expose internet services

    - by tmow
    Hi all, we have developed/customized an internet site that provides functionalities like sharing, swap/barter, selling and rent any object/services trough public or private galleries and/or clubs. We'd like now to expose all or some of the services to the public, so that anybody can take advantage of our engine, but without spending too much as we rae running low on budget. At the moment we have developed some RSS interfaces for the public catalogs and is possible to use JQuery to query the engine. Do you have any advices on how to proceed here? We were thinking about something simple like framset, using openID like authentication, or similar technologies. Even if can be the coolest solution, we a would like to avoid the develop soap, rest or xmlrpc APIs as it takes a lot of time ( =money ) Do you have any super smart ideas?

    Read the article

  • Best way to do TDD in express versions of visual studio(eg VB Express)

    - by Nathan W
    I have been looking in to doing some test driven development for one of the applications that I'm currently writing(OLE wrapper for an OLE object). The only problem is that I am using the express versions of Visual Studio(for now), at the moment I am using VB express but sometimes I use C# express. Is it possible to do TDD in the express versions? If so what are the bast was to go about it? Cheers. EDIT. By the looks of things I will have to buy the full visual studio so that I can do integrated TDD, hopefully there is money in the budget to buy a copy :). For now I think I will use Nunit like everyone is saying.

    Read the article

  • Existing SQL database android help

    - by basketball4567
    Hey guys, I am new to android programming and i am trying to make an app that will interface with a website i have. It is a movie website with all of its information stored in SQL database. I know how to write the requests and queries in .asp but dont know how to get information from the database in my app. I want the user to be able to enter a movie title, and through a couple of stored procedures that are in my SQL database, return the info on that movie(actor, budget, genre....). I would like to have little info stored on the device, have all of the queries being sent to my SQL server and just have the info being returned. So my question boils down to, how do i link my existing SQL database with an android app. Any help would be great. Thanks Basketball4567

    Read the article

  • What next generation low level language is the best bet to migrate the code base ?

    - by e-satis
    Let's say you have a company running a lot of C/C++, and you want to start planning migration to new technologies so you don't end up like COBOL companies 15 years ago. For now, C/C++ runs more than fine and there is plenty dev on the market for it. But you want to start thinking about it now, because given the huge running code base and the data sensitivity, you feel it can take 5-10 years to move to the next step without overloading the budget and the dev teams. You have heard about D, starting to be quite mature, and Go, promising to be quite popular. What would be your choice and why?

    Read the article

  • Table per subclass inheritance relationship: How to query against the Parent class without loading a

    - by Arthur Ronald F D Garcia
    Suppose a Table per subclass inheritance relationship which can be described bellow (From wikibooks.org - see here) Notice Parent class is not abstract @Entity @Inheritance(strategy=InheritanceType.JOINED) public class Project { @Id private long id; // Other properties } @Entity @Table(name="LARGEPROJECT") public class LargeProject extends Project { private BigDecimal budget; } @Entity @Table(name="SMALLPROJECT") public class SmallProject extends Project { } I have a scenario where i just need to retrieve the Parent class. Because of performance issues, What should i do to run a HQL query in order to retrieve the Parent class and just the Parent class without loading any subclass ???

    Read the article

  • SQLAuthority News – SafePeak’s SQL Server Performance Contest – Winners

    - by pinaldave
    SafePeak, the unique automated SQL performance acceleration and performance tuning software vendor, announced the winners of their SQL Performance Contest 2011. The contest quite unique: the writer of the best / most interesting and most community liked “performance story” would win an expensive gadget. The judges were the community DBAs that could participating and Like’ing stories and could also win expensive prizes. Robert Pearl SQL MVP, was the contest supervisor. I liked most of the stories and decided then to contact SafePeak and suggested to participate in the give-away and they have gladly accepted the same. The winner of best story is: Jason Brimhall (USA) with a story about a proc with a fair amount of business logic. Congratulations Jason! The 3 participants won the second prize of $100 gift card on amazon.com are: Michael Corey (USA), Hakim Ali (USA) and Alex Bernal (USA). And 5 participants won a printed copy of a book of mine (Book Reviews of SQL Wait Stats Joes 2 Pros: SQL Performance Tuning Techniques Using Wait Statistics, Types & Queues) are: Patrick Kansa (USA), Wagner Bianchi (USA), Riyas.V.K (India), Farzana Patwa (USA) and Wagner Crivelini (Brazil). The winners are welcome to send safepeak their mail address to receive the prizes (to “info ‘at’ safepeak.com”). Also SafePeak team asked me to welcome you all to continue sending stories, simply because they (and we all) like to read interesting stuff) as well as to send them ideas for future contests. You can do it from here: www.safepeak.com/SQL-Performance-Contest-2011/Submit-Story Congratulations to everybody! I found this very funny video about SafePeak: It looks like someone (maybe the vendor) played with video’s once and created this non-commercial like video: SafePeak dynamic caching is an immediate plug-n-play performance acceleration and scalability solution for cloud, hosted and business SQL server applications. By caching in memory result sets of queries and stored procedures, while keeping all those cache correct and up to date using unique patent pending technology, SafePeak can fix SQL performance problems and bottlenecks of most applications – most importantly: without actual code changes. By the way, I checked their website prior this contest announcement and noticed that they are running these days a special end year promotion giving between 30% to 45% discounts. Since the installation is quick and full testing can be done within couple of days – those have the need (performance problems) and have budget leftovers: I suggest you hurry. A free fully functional trial is here: www.safepeak.com/download, while those that want to start with a quote should ping here www.safepeak.com/quote. Good luck! Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Performance, SQL Puzzle, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • Guidance: A Branching strategy for Scrum Teams

    - by Martin Hinshelwood
    Having a good branching strategy will save your bacon, or at least your code. Be careful when deviating from your branching strategy because if you do, you may be worse off than when you started! This is one possible branching strategy for Scrum teams and I will not be going in depth with Scrum but you can find out more about Scrum by reading the Scrum Guide and you can even assess your Scrum knowledge by having a go at the Scrum Open Assessment. You can also read SSW’s Rules to Better Scrum using TFS which have been developed during our own Scrum implementations. Acknowledgements Bill Heys – Bill offered some good feedback on this post and helped soften the language. Note: Bill is a VS ALM Ranger and co-wrote the Branching Guidance for TFS 2010 Willy-Peter Schaub – Willy-Peter is an ex Visual Studio ALM MVP turned blue badge and has been involved in most of the guidance including the Branching Guidance for TFS 2010 Chris Birmele – Chris wrote some of the early TFS Branching and Merging Guidance. Dr Paul Neumeyer, Ph.D Parallel Processes, ScrumMaster and SSW Solution Architect – Paul wanted to have feature branches coming from the release branch as well. We agreed that this is really a spin-off that needs own project, backlog, budget and Team. Scenario: A product is developed RTM 1.0 is released and gets great sales.  Extra features are demanded but the new version will have double to price to pay to recover costs, work is approved by the guys with budget and a few sprints later RTM 2.0 is released.  Sales a very low due to the pricing strategy. There are lots of clients on RTM 1.0 calling out for patches. As I keep getting Reverse Integration and Forward Integration mixed up and Bill keeps slapping my wrists I thought I should have a reminder: You still seemed to use reverse and/or forward integration in the wrong context. I would recommend reviewing your document at the end to ensure that it agrees with the common understanding of these terms merge (forward integration) from parent to child (same direction as the branch), and merge  (reverse integration) from child to parent (the reverse direction of the branch). - one of my many slaps on the wrist from Bill Heys.   As I mentioned previously we are using a single feature branching strategy in our current project. The single biggest mistake developers make is developing against the “Main” or “Trunk” line. This ultimately leads to messy code as things are added and never finished. Your only alternative is to NEVER check in unless your code is 100%, but this does not work in practice, even with a single developer. Your ADD will kick in and your half-finished code will be finished enough to pass the build and the tests. You do use builds don’t you? Sadly, this is a very common scenario and I have had people argue that branching merely adds complexity. Then again I have seen the other side of the universe ... branching  structures from he... We should somehow convince everyone that there is a happy between no-branching and too-much-branching. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft   A key benefit of branching for development is to isolate changes from the stable Main branch. Branching adds sanity more than it adds complexity. We do try to stress in our guidance that it is important to justify a branch, by doing a cost benefit analysis. The primary cost is the effort to do merges and resolve conflicts. A key benefit is that you have a stable code base in Main and accept changes into Main only after they pass quality gates, etc. - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft The second biggest mistake developers make is branching anything other than the WHOLE “Main” line. If you branch parts of your code and not others it gets out of sync and can make integration a nightmare. You should have your Source, Assets, Build scripts deployment scripts and dependencies inside the “Main” folder and branch the whole thing. Some departments within MSFT even go as far as to add the environments used to develop the product in there as well; although I would not recommend that unless you have a massive SQL cluster to house your source code. We tried the “add environment” back in South-Africa and while it was “phenomenal”, especially when having to switch between environments, the disk storage and processing requirements killed us. We opted for virtualization to skin this cat of keeping a ready-to-go environment handy. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft   I think people often think that you should have separate branches for separate environments (e.g. Dev, Test, Integration Test, QA, etc.). I prefer to think of deploying to environments (such as from Main to QA) rather than branching for QA). - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft   You can read about SSW’s Rules to better Source Control for some additional information on what Source Control to use and how to use it. There are also a number of branching Anti-Patterns that should be avoided at all costs: You know you are on the wrong track if you experience one or more of the following symptoms in your development environment: Merge Paranoia—avoiding merging at all cost, usually because of a fear of the consequences. Merge Mania—spending too much time merging software assets instead of developing them. Big Bang Merge—deferring branch merging to the end of the development effort and attempting to merge all branches simultaneously. Never-Ending Merge—continuous merging activity because there is always more to merge. Wrong-Way Merge—merging a software asset version with an earlier version. Branch Mania—creating many branches for no apparent reason. Cascading Branches—branching but never merging back to the main line. Mysterious Branches—branching for no apparent reason. Temporary Branches—branching for changing reasons, so the branch becomes a permanent temporary workspace. Volatile Branches—branching with unstable software assets shared by other branches or merged into another branch. Note   Branches are volatile most of the time while they exist as independent branches. That is the point of having them. The difference is that you should not share or merge branches while they are in an unstable state. Development Freeze—stopping all development activities while branching, merging, and building new base lines. Berlin Wall—using branches to divide the development team members, instead of dividing the work they are performing. -Branching and Merging Primer by Chris Birmele - Developer Tools Technical Specialist at Microsoft Pty Ltd in Australia   In fact, this can result in a merge exercise no-one wants to be involved in, merging hundreds of thousands of change sets and trying to get a consolidated build. Again, we need to find a happy medium. - Willy-Peter Schaub on Merge Paranoia Merge conflicts are generally the result of making changes to the same file in both the target and source branch. If you create merge conflicts, you will eventually need to resolve them. Often the resolution is manual. Merging more frequently allows you to resolve these conflicts close to when they happen, making the resolution clearer. Waiting weeks or months to resolve them, the Big Bang approach, means you are more likely to resolve conflicts incorrectly. - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft   Figure: Main line, this is where your stable code lives and where any build has known entities, always passes and has a happy test that passes as well? Many development projects consist of, a single “Main” line of source and artifacts. This is good; at least there is source control . There are however a couple of issues that need to be considered. What happens if: you and your team are working on a new set of features and the customer wants a change to his current version? you are working on two features and the customer decides to abandon one of them? you have two teams working on different feature sets and their changes start interfering with each other? I just use labels instead of branches? That's a lot of “what if’s”, but there is a simple way of preventing this. Branching… In TFS, labels are not immutable. This does not mean they are not useful. But labels do not provide a very good development isolation mechanism. Branching allows separate code sets to evolve separately (e.g. Current with hotfixes, and vNext with new development). I don’t see how labels work here. - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft   Figure: Creating a single feature branch means you can isolate the development work on that branch.   Its standard practice for large projects with lots of developers to use Feature branching and you can check the Branching Guidance for the latest recommendations from the Visual Studio ALM Rangers for other methods. In the diagram above you can see my recommendation for branching when using Scrum development with TFS 2010. It consists of a single Sprint branch to contain all the changes for the current sprint. The main branch has the permissions changes so contributors to the project can only Branch and Merge with “Main”. This will prevent accidental check-ins or checkouts of the “Main” line that would contaminate the code. The developers continue to develop on sprint one until the completion of the sprint. Note: In the real world, starting a new Greenfield project, this process starts at Sprint 2 as at the start of Sprint 1 you would have artifacts in version control and no need for isolation.   Figure: Once the sprint is complete the Sprint 1 code can then be merged back into the Main line. There are always good practices to follow, and one is to always do a Forward Integration from Main into Sprint 1 before you do a Reverse Integration from Sprint 1 back into Main. In this case it may seem superfluous, but this builds good muscle memory into your developer’s work ethic and means that no bad habits are learned that would interfere with additional Scrum Teams being added to the Product. The process of completing your sprint development: The Team completes their work according to their definition of done. Merge from “Main” into “Sprint1” (Forward Integration) Stabilize your code with any changes coming from other Scrum Teams working on the same product. If you have one Scrum Team this should be quick, but there may have been bug fixes in the Release branches. (we will talk about release branches later) Merge from “Sprint1” into “Main” to commit your changes. (Reverse Integration) Check-in Delete the Sprint1 branch Note: The Sprint 1 branch is no longer required as its useful life has been concluded. Check-in Done But you are not yet done with the Sprint. The goal in Scrum is to have a “potentially shippable product” at the end of every Sprint, and we do not have that yet, we only have finished code.   Figure: With Sprint 1 merged you can create a Release branch and run your final packaging and testing In 99% of all projects I have been involved in or watched, a “shippable product” only happens towards the end of the overall lifecycle, especially when sprints are short. The in-between releases are great demonstration releases, but not shippable. Perhaps it comes from my 80’s brain washing that we only ship when we reach the agreed quality and business feature bar. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft Although you should have been testing and packaging your code all the way through your Sprint 1 development, preferably using an automated process, you still need to test and package with stable unchanging code. This is where you do what at SSW we call a “Test Please”. This is first an internal test of the product to make sure it meets the needs of the customer and you generally use a resource external to your Team. Then a “Test Please” is conducted with the Product Owner to make sure he is happy with the output. You can read about how to conduct a Test Please on our Rules to Successful Projects: Do you conduct an internal "test please" prior to releasing a version to a client?   Figure: If you find a deviation from the expected result you fix it on the Release branch. If during your final testing or your “Test Please” you find there are issues or bugs then you should fix them on the release branch. If you can’t fix them within the time box of your Sprint, then you will need to create a Bug and put it onto the backlog for prioritization by the Product owner. Make sure you leave plenty of time between your merge from the development branch to find and fix any problems that are uncovered. This process is commonly called Stabilization and should always be conducted once you have completed all of your User Stories and integrated all of your branches. Even once you have stabilized and released, you should not delete the release branch as you would with the Sprint branch. It has a usefulness for servicing that may extend well beyond the limited life you expect of it. Note: Don't get forced by the business into adding features into a Release branch instead that indicates the unspoken requirement is that they are asking for a product spin-off. In this case you can create a new Team Project and branch from the required Release branch to create a new Main branch for that product. And you create a whole new backlog to work from.   Figure: When the Team decides it is happy with the product you can create a RTM branch. Once you have fixed all the bugs you can, and added any you can’t to the Product Backlog, and you Team is happy with the result you can create a Release. This would consist of doing the final Build and Packaging it up ready for your Sprint Review meeting. You would then create a read-only branch that represents the code you “shipped”. This is really an Audit trail branch that is optional, but is good practice. You could use a Label, but Labels are not Auditable and if a dispute was raised by the customer you can produce a verifiable version of the source code for an independent party to check. Rare I know, but you do not want to be at the wrong end of a legal battle. Like the Release branch the RTM branch should never be deleted, or only deleted according to your companies legal policy, which in the UK is usually 7 years.   Figure: If you have made any changes in the Release you will need to merge back up to Main in order to finalise the changes. Nothing is really ever done until it is in Main. The same rules apply when merging any fixes in the Release branch back into Main and you should do a reverse merge before a forward merge, again for the muscle memory more than necessity at this stage. Your Sprint is now nearly complete, and you can have a Sprint Review meeting knowing that you have made every effort and taken every precaution to protect your customer’s investment. Note: In order to really achieve protection for both you and your client you would add Automated Builds, Automated Tests, Automated Acceptance tests, Acceptance test tracking, Unit Tests, Load tests, Web test and all the other good engineering practices that help produce reliable software.     Figure: After the Sprint Planning meeting the process begins again. Where the Sprint Review and Retrospective meetings mark the end of the Sprint, the Sprint Planning meeting marks the beginning. After you have completed your Sprint Planning and you know what you are trying to achieve in Sprint 2 you can create your new Branch to develop in. How do we handle a bug(s) in production that can’t wait? Although in Scrum the only work done should be on the backlog there should be a little buffer added to the Sprint Planning for contingencies. One of these contingencies is a bug in the current release that can’t wait for the Sprint to finish. But how do you handle that? Willy-Peter Schaub asked an excellent question on the release activities: In reality Sprint 2 starts when sprint 1 ends + weekend. Should we not cater for a possible parallelism between Sprint 2 and the release activities of sprint 1? It would introduce FI’s from main to sprint 2, I guess. Your “Figure: Merging print 2 back into Main.” covers, what I tend to believe to be reality in most cases. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft I agree, and if you have a single Scrum team then your resources are limited. The Scrum Team is responsible for packaging and release, so at least one run at stabilization, package and release should be included in the Sprint time box. If more are needed on the current production release during the Sprint 2 time box then resource needs to be pulled from Sprint 2. The Product Owner and the Team have four choices (in order of disruption/cost): Backlog: Add the bug to the backlog and fix it in the next Sprint Buffer Time: Use any buffer time included in the current Sprint to fix the bug quickly Make time: Remove a Story from the current Sprint that is of equal value to the time lost fixing the bug(s) and releasing. Note: The Team must agree that it can still meet the Sprint Goal. Cancel Sprint: Cancel the sprint and concentrate all resource on fixing the bug(s) Note: This can be a very costly if the current sprint has already had a lot of work completed as it will be lost. The choice will depend on the complexity and severity of the bug(s) and both the Product Owner and the Team need to agree. In this case we will go with option #2 or #3 as they are uncomplicated but severe bugs. Figure: Real world issue where a bug needs fixed in the current release. If the bug(s) is urgent enough then then your only option is to fix it in place. You can edit the release branch to find and fix the bug, hopefully creating a test so it can’t happen again. Follow the prior process and conduct an internal and customer “Test Please” before releasing. You can read about how to conduct a Test Please on our Rules to Successful Projects: Do you conduct an internal "test please" prior to releasing a version to a client?   Figure: After you have fixed the bug you need to ship again. You then need to again create an RTM branch to hold the version of the code you released in escrow.   Figure: Main is now out of sync with your Release. We now need to get these new changes back up into the Main branch. Do a reverse and then forward merge again to get the new code into Main. But what about the branch, are developers not working on Sprint 2? Does Sprint 2 now have changes that are not in Main and Main now have changes that are not in Sprint 2? Well, yes… and this is part of the hit you take doing branching. But would this scenario even have been possible without branching?   Figure: Getting the changes in Main into Sprint 2 is very important. The Team now needs to do a Forward Integration merge into their Sprint and resolve any conflicts that occur. Maybe the bug has already been fixed in Sprint 2, maybe the bug no longer exists! This needs to be identified and resolved by the developers before they continue to get further out of Sync with Main. Note: Avoid the “Big bang merge” at all costs.   Figure: Merging Sprint 2 back into Main, the Forward Integration, and R0 terminates. Sprint 2 now merges (Reverse Integration) back into Main following the procedures we have already established.   Figure: The logical conclusion. This then allows the creation of the next release. By now you should be getting the big picture and hopefully you learned something useful from this post. I know I have enjoyed writing it as I find these exploratory posts coupled with real world experience really help harden my understanding.  Branching is a tool; it is not a silver bullet. Don’t over use it, and avoid “Anti-Patterns” where possible. Although the diagram above looks complicated I hope showing you how it is formed simplifies it as much as possible.   Technorati Tags: Branching,Scrum,VS ALM,TFS 2010,VS2010

    Read the article

  • Emperors don’t come cheap

    - by RoyOsherove
    “Sorry” I replied in a polite email. “Maybe next year, when budgets allow for this”. It was addressed to the organizer of TechEd US, which was to be in New Orleans this year. Man, I would have loved to be in new Orleans this year, but, I guess these guys only understand one language – and I won’t be their puppy any more. You see, they wouldn’t pay for my business class flight to TechEd from Israel. Me– the great emperor of unit testing?! travelling coach for 12 hours? No thanks. I have better things to do! And this is after last year, they only invited me to have one talk throughout the conference. one talk. After the year before I was on the top ten speakers list of that conference?! No sir! They did give it a good try, though. They said they can pay up to 4,000$ per flight cost for me, and that they only found a flight at about 5460$. “Unacceptable” I told them when they asked if I would pay the difference. And that was that. Goodbye teched. As I closed up gmail, wondering if I should have told them that I found a similar flight at 4,300$, and came back to the living room, I told my wife, all full of myself “I just canceled teched”. “Oh good” she said. Not even looking at me as she tried to feed our one year old. “did you tell them you need to cancel because you already have another flight that month and your wife won’t let you travel more than once a month anymore?” “Yeah right” I said. Just what I need – for people to realize I’m totally whipped. I still need an ounce of dignity. “I told those bastards that if they want me they have to make an effort. People like me don’t come cheap, you know?” “You’re an idiot for not telling them the real reason.” She handed me the baby.  “What if they found a flight that matches their budget? How would you have gotten away from that engagement?” . She put on “Lost” on the media center and sat next to me. I did not reply.

    Read the article

  • Open Data, Government and Transparency

    - by Tori Wieldt
    A new track at TDC (The Developer's Conference in Sao Paulo, Brazil) is titled Open Data. It deals with open data, government and transparency. Saturday will be a "transparency hacker day" where developers are invited to create applications using open data from the Brazilian government.  Alexandre Gomes, co-lead of the track, says "I want to inspire developers to become "Civic hackers:" developers who create apps to make society better." It is a chance for developers to do well and do good. There are many opportunities for developers, including monitoring government expenditures and getting citizens involved via social networks. The open data movement is growing worldwide. One initiative, the Open Government Partnership, is working to make government data easier to find and access. Making this data easily available means that with the right applications, it will be easier for people to make decisions and suggestions about government policies based on detailed information. Last April, the Open Government Partnership held its annual meeting in Brasilia, the capitol of Brazil. It was a great success showcasing the innovative work being done in open data by governments, civil societies and individuals around the world. For example, Bulgaria now publishes daily data on budget spending for all public institutions. Alexandre Gomes Explains Open Data At TDC, the Open Data track will include a presentation of examples of successful open data projects, an introduction to the semantic web, how to handle big data sets, techniques of data visualization, and how to design APIs.The other track lead is Christian Moryah Miranda, a systems analyst for the Brazilian Government's Ministry of Planning. "The Brazilian government wholeheartedly supports this effort. In order to make our data available to the public, it forces us to be more consistent with our data across ministries, and that's a good step forward for us," he said. He explained the government knows they cannot achieve everything they would like without help from the public. "It is not the government versus the people, rather citizens are partners with the government, and together we can achieve great things!" Miranda exclaimed. Saturday at TDC will be a "transparency hacker day" where developers will be invited to create applications using open data from the Brazilian government. Attendees are invited to pitch their ideas, work in small groups, and present their project at the end of the conference. "For example," Gomes said, "the Brazilian government just released the salaries of all government employees and I can't wait to see what developers can do with that." Resources Open Government Partnership  U.S. Government Open Data ProjectBrazilian Government Open Data ProjectU.K. Government Open Data Project 2012 International Open Government Data Conference 

    Read the article

  • Deciding which technology to use is a big decision when no technology is an obvious choice

    Deciding which technology to use in a new venture or project is a big decision for any company when no technology is an obvious choice. It is always best to analyze the current requirements of the project, and also evaluate the existing technology climate so that the correct technology based on the situation at the time is selected. When evaluation the requirements of a new project it is best to be open to as many technologies as possible initially so a company can be sure that the right decision gets made. Another important aspect of the technology decision is what can the current network and  hardware environment handle, and what would be needed to be adjusted if a specific technology was selected. For example if the current network operating system is Linux then VB6 would force  a huge change in the current computing environment. However if the current network operation system was windows based then very little change would be needed to allow for VB6 if any change had to be done at all. Finally and most importantly an analysis should be done regarding the current technical employees pertaining to their skills and aspirations. For example if you have a team of Java programmers then forcing them to build something in C# might not be an ideal situation. However having a team of VB.net developers who want to develop something in C# would be a better situation based on this example because they are already failure with the .Net Framework and have a desire to use the new technology. In addition to this analysis the cost associated with building and maintaining the project is also a key factor. If two languages are ideal for a project but one technology will increase the budget or timeline by 50% then it might not be the best choice in that situation. An ideal situation for developing in C# applications would be a project that is built on existing Microsoft technologies. An example of this would be a company who uses Windows 2008 Server as their network operating system, Windows XP Pro as their main operation system, Microsoft SQL Server 2008 as their primary database, and has a team of developers experience in the .net framework. In the above situation Java would be a poor technology decision based on their current computing environment and potential lack of Java development by the company’s developers. It would take the developers longer to develop the application due the fact that they would have to first learn the language and then become comfortable with the language. Although these barriers do exist, it does not mean that it is not due able if the company and developers were committed to the project.

    Read the article

  • Java Spotlight Episode 139: Mark Heckler and José Pereda on JES based Energy Monitoring @MkHeck @JPeredaDnr

    - by Roger Brinkley
    Interview with Mark Heckler and José Pereda on using JavaSE Embedded with the Java Embedded Suite on a RaspberryPI along with a JavaFX client to monitor an energy production system and their JavaOne Tutorial- Java Embedded EXTREME MASHUPS: Building self-powering sensor nets for the IoT Right-click or Control-click to download this MP3 file. You can also subscribe to the Java Spotlight Podcast Feed to get the latest podcast automatically. If you use iTunes you can open iTunes and subscribe with this link: Java Spotlight Podcast in iTunes. Show Notes News Java Virtual Developer Day Session Videos Available JavaFX Maven Plugin 2.0 Released JavaFX Scene Builder 1.1 build b28 FXForm 2 release 0.2.2 OpenJDK8/Zero cross compile build for Foundation model HSAIL-based GPU offload: the Quest for Java Performance Begins Progress on Moving to Gradle Java EE 7 Launch Keynote Replay Java EE 7 Technical Breakouts Replay Java EE 7 support in NetBeans 7.3.1 Java EE 7 support in Eclipse 4.3 Java Magazine - May/June Events Jul 16-19, Uberconf, Denver, USA Jul 22-24, JavaOne Shanghai, China Jul 29-31, JVM Language Summit, Santa Clara Sep 11-12, JavaZone, Oslo, Norway Sep 19-20, Strange Loop, St. Louis Sep 22-26 JavaOne San Francisco 2013, USA Feature Interview Mark Heckler is an Oracle Corporation Java/Middleware/Core Tech Engineer with development experience in numerous environments. He has worked for and with key players in the manufacturing, emerging markets, retail, medical, telecom, and financial industries to develop and deliver critical capabilities on time and on budget. Currently, he works primarily with large government customers using Java throughout the stack and across the enterprise. He also participates in open-source development at every opportunity, being a JFXtras project committer and developer of DialogFX, MonologFX, and various other projects. When Mark isn't working with Java, he enjoys writing about his experiences at the Java Jungle website (https://blogs.oracle.com/javajungle/) and on Twitter (@MkHeck). José Pereda is a Structural Engineer working in the School of Engineers in the University of Valladolid in Spain for more than 15 years, and his passion is related to applying programming to solve real problems. Being involved with Java since 1999, José shares his time between JavaFX and the Embedded world, developing commercial applications and open source projects (https://github.com/jperedadnr), and blogging (http://jperedadnr.blogspot.com.es/) or tweeting (@JPeredaDnr) of both. What’s Cool AquaFX 0.1 - Mac OS X skin for JavaFX by Claudine Zillmann DromblerFX adds a docking framework Part 2 of Gerrit’s taming the Nashorn for writing JavaFX apps in Javascript Tool from mihosoft called JSelect for quickly switching JDKs Apache Maven Javadoc Plugin 2.9.1 Released Proposal: Java Concurrency Stress tests (jcstress) Slide-free Code-driven session at SV JUG JavaOne approvals/rejects gone out

    Read the article

  • The Incremental Architect&acute;s Napkin &ndash; #3 &ndash; Make Evolvability inevitable

    - by Ralf Westphal
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/theArchitectsNapkin/archive/2014/06/04/the-incremental-architectacutes-napkin-ndash-3-ndash-make-evolvability-inevitable.aspxThe easier something to measure the more likely it will be produced. Deviations between what is and what should be can be readily detected. That´s what automated acceptance tests are for. That´s what sprint reviews in Scrum are for. It´s no small wonder our software looks like it looks. It has all the traits whose conformance with requirements can easily be measured. And it´s lacking traits which cannot easily be measured. Evolvability (or Changeability) is such a trait. If an operation is correct, if an operation if fast enough, that can be checked very easily. But whether Evolvability is high or low, that cannot be checked by taking a measure or two. Evolvability might correlate with certain traits, e.g. number of lines of code (LOC) per function or Cyclomatic Complexity or test coverage. But there is no threshold value signalling “evolvability too low”; also Evolvability is hardly tangible for the customer. Nevertheless Evolvability is of great importance - at least in the long run. You can get away without much of it for a short time. Eventually, though, it´s needed like any other requirement. Or even more. Because without Evolvability no other requirement can be implemented. Evolvability is the foundation on which all else is build. Such fundamental importance is in stark contrast with its immeasurability. To compensate this, Evolvability must be put at the very center of software development. It must become the hub around everything else revolves. Since we cannot measure Evolvability, though, we cannot start watching it more. Instead we need to establish practices to keep it high (enough) at all times. Chefs have known that for long. That´s why everybody in a restaurant kitchen is constantly seeing after cleanliness. Hygiene is important as is to have clean tools at standardized locations. Only then the health of the patrons can be guaranteed and production efficiency is constantly high. Still a kitchen´s level of cleanliness is easier to measure than software Evolvability. That´s why important practices like reviews, pair programming, or TDD are not enough, I guess. What we need to keep Evolvability in focus and high is… to continually evolve. Change must not be something to avoid but too embrace. To me that means the whole change cycle from requirement analysis to delivery needs to be gone through more often. Scrum´s sprints of 4, 2 even 1 week are too long. Kanban´s flow of user stories across is too unreliable; it takes as long as it takes. Instead we should fix the cycle time at 2 days max. I call that Spinning. No increment must take longer than from this morning until tomorrow evening to finish. Then it should be acceptance checked by the customer (or his/her representative, e.g. a Product Owner). For me there are several resasons for such a fixed and short cycle time for each increment: Clear expectations Absolute estimates (“This will take X days to complete.”) are near impossible in software development as explained previously. Too much unplanned research and engineering work lurk in every feature. And then pervasive interruptions of work by peers and management. However, the smaller the scope the better our absolute estimates become. That´s because we understand better what really are the requirements and what the solution should look like. But maybe more importantly the shorter the timespan the more we can control how we use our time. So much can happen over the course of a week and longer timespans. But if push comes to shove I can block out all distractions and interruptions for a day or possibly two. That´s why I believe we can give rough absolute estimates on 3 levels: Noon Tonight Tomorrow Think of a meeting with a Product Owner at 8:30 in the morning. If she asks you, how long it will take you to implement a user story or bug fix, you can say, “It´ll be fixed by noon.”, or you can say, “I can manage to implement it until tonight before I leave.”, or you can say, “You´ll get it by tomorrow night at latest.” Yes, I believe all else would be naive. If you´re not confident to get something done by tomorrow night (some 34h from now) you just cannot reliably commit to any timeframe. That means you should not promise anything, you should not even start working on the issue. So when estimating use these four categories: Noon, Tonight, Tomorrow, NoClue - with NoClue meaning the requirement needs to be broken down further so each aspect can be assigned to one of the first three categories. If you like absolute estimates, here you go. But don´t do deep estimates. Don´t estimate dozens of issues; don´t think ahead (“Issue A is a Tonight, then B will be a Tomorrow, after that it´s C as a Noon, finally D is a Tonight - that´s what I´ll do this week.”). Just estimate so Work-in-Progress (WIP) is 1 for everybody - plus a small number of buffer issues. To be blunt: Yes, this makes promises impossible as to what a team will deliver in terms of scope at a certain date in the future. But it will give a Product Owner a clear picture of what to pull for acceptance feedback tonight and tomorrow. Trust through reliability Our trade is lacking trust. Customers don´t trust software companies/departments much. Managers don´t trust developers much. I find that perfectly understandable in the light of what we´re trying to accomplish: delivering software in the face of uncertainty by means of material good production. Customers as well as managers still expect software development to be close to production of houses or cars. But that´s a fundamental misunderstanding. Software development ist development. It´s basically research. As software developers we´re constantly executing experiments to find out what really provides value to users. We don´t know what they need, we just have mediated hypothesises. That´s why we cannot reliably deliver on preposterous demands. So trust is out of the window in no time. If we switch to delivering in short cycles, though, we can regain trust. Because estimates - explicit or implicit - up to 32 hours at most can be satisfied. I´d say: reliability over scope. It´s more important to reliably deliver what was promised then to cover a lot of requirement area. So when in doubt promise less - but deliver without delay. Deliver on scope (Functionality and Quality); but also deliver on Evolvability, i.e. on inner quality according to accepted principles. Always. Trust will be the reward. Less complexity of communication will follow. More goodwill buffer will follow. So don´t wait for some Kanban board to show you, that flow can be improved by scheduling smaller stories. You don´t need to learn that the hard way. Just start with small batch sizes of three different sizes. Fast feedback What has been finished can be checked for acceptance. Why wait for a sprint of several weeks to end? Why let the mental model of the issue and its solution dissipate? If you get final feedback after one or two weeks, you hardly remember what you did and why you did it. Resoning becomes hard. But more importantly youo probably are not in the mood anymore to go back to something you deemed done a long time ago. It´s boring, it´s frustrating to open up that mental box again. Learning is harder the longer it takes from event to feedback. Effort can be wasted between event (finishing an issue) and feedback, because other work might go in the wrong direction based on false premises. Checking finished issues for acceptance is the most important task of a Product Owner. It´s even more important than planning new issues. Because as long as work started is not released (accepted) it´s potential waste. So before starting new work better make sure work already done has value. By putting the emphasis on acceptance rather than planning true pull is established. As long as planning and starting work is more important, it´s a push process. Accept a Noon issue on the same day before leaving. Accept a Tonight issue before leaving today or first thing tomorrow morning. Accept a Tomorrow issue tomorrow night before leaving or early the day after tomorrow. After acceptance the developer(s) can start working on the next issue. Flexibility As if reliability/trust and fast feedback for less waste weren´t enough economic incentive, there is flexibility. After each issue the Product Owner can change course. If on Monday morning feature slices A, B, C, D, E were important and A, B, C were scheduled for acceptance by Monday evening and Tuesday evening, the Product Owner can change her mind at any time. Maybe after A got accepted she asks for continuation with D. But maybe, just maybe, she has gotten a completely different idea by then. Maybe she wants work to continue on F. And after B it´s neither D nor E, but G. And after G it´s D. With Spinning every 32 hours at latest priorities can be changed. And nothing is lost. Because what got accepted is of value. It provides an incremental value to the customer/user. Or it provides internal value to the Product Owner as increased knowledge/decreased uncertainty. I find such reactivity over commitment economically very benefical. Why commit a team to some workload for several weeks? It´s unnecessary at beast, and inflexible and wasteful at worst. If we cannot promise delivery of a certain scope on a certain date - which is what customers/management usually want -, we can at least provide them with unpredecented flexibility in the face of high uncertainty. Where the path is not clear, cannot be clear, make small steps so you´re able to change your course at any time. Premature completion Customers/management are used to premeditating budgets. They want to know exactly how much to pay for a certain amount of requirements. That´s understandable. But it does not match with the nature of software development. We should know that by now. Maybe there´s somewhere in the world some team who can consistently deliver on scope, quality, and time, and budget. Great! Congratulations! I, however, haven´t seen such a team yet. Which does not mean it´s impossible, but I think it´s nothing I can recommend to strive for. Rather I´d say: Don´t try this at home. It might hurt you one way or the other. However, what we can do, is allow customers/management stop work on features at any moment. With spinning every 32 hours a feature can be declared as finished - even though it might not be completed according to initial definition. I think, progress over completion is an important offer software development can make. Why think in terms of completion beyond a promise for the next 32 hours? Isn´t it more important to constantly move forward? Step by step. We´re not running sprints, we´re not running marathons, not even ultra-marathons. We´re in the sport of running forever. That makes it futile to stare at the finishing line. The very concept of a burn-down chart is misleading (in most cases). Whoever can only think in terms of completed requirements shuts out the chance for saving money. The requirements for a features mostly are uncertain. So how does a Product Owner know in the first place, how much is needed. Maybe more than specified is needed - which gets uncovered step by step with each finished increment. Maybe less than specified is needed. After each 4–32 hour increment the Product Owner can do an experient (or invite users to an experiment) if a particular trait of the software system is already good enough. And if so, she can switch the attention to a different aspect. In the end, requirements A, B, C then could be finished just 70%, 80%, and 50%. What the heck? It´s good enough - for now. 33% money saved. Wouldn´t that be splendid? Isn´t that a stunning argument for any budget-sensitive customer? You can save money and still get what you need? Pull on practices So far, in addition to more trust, more flexibility, less money spent, Spinning led to “doing less” which also means less code which of course means higher Evolvability per se. Last but not least, though, I think Spinning´s short acceptance cycles have one more effect. They excert pull-power on all sorts of practices known for increasing Evolvability. If, for example, you believe high automated test coverage helps Evolvability by lowering the fear of inadverted damage to a code base, why isn´t 90% of the developer community practicing automated tests consistently? I think, the answer is simple: Because they can do without. Somehow they manage to do enough manual checks before their rare releases/acceptance checks to ensure good enough correctness - at least in the short term. The same goes for other practices like component orientation, continuous build/integration, code reviews etc. None of that is compelling, urgent, imperative. Something else always seems more important. So Evolvability principles and practices fall through the cracks most of the time - until a project hits a wall. Then everybody becomes desperate; but by then (re)gaining Evolvability has become as very, very difficult and tedious undertaking. Sometimes up to the point where the existence of a project/company is in danger. With Spinning that´s different. If you´re practicing Spinning you cannot avoid all those practices. With Spinning you very quickly realize you cannot deliver reliably even on your 32 hour promises. Spinning thus is pulling on developers to adopt principles and practices for Evolvability. They will start actively looking for ways to keep their delivery rate high. And if not, management will soon tell them to do that. Because first the Product Owner then management will notice an increasing difficulty to deliver value within 32 hours. There, finally there emerges a way to measure Evolvability: The more frequent developers tell the Product Owner there is no way to deliver anything worth of feedback until tomorrow night, the poorer Evolvability is. Don´t count the “WTF!”, count the “No way!” utterances. In closing For sustainable software development we need to put Evolvability first. Functionality and Quality must not rule software development but be implemented within a framework ensuring (enough) Evolvability. Since Evolvability cannot be measured easily, I think we need to put software development “under pressure”. Software needs to be changed more often, in smaller increments. Each increment being relevant to the customer/user in some way. That does not mean each increment is worthy of shipment. It´s sufficient to gain further insight from it. Increments primarily serve the reduction of uncertainty, not sales. Sales even needs to be decoupled from this incremental progress. No more promises to sales. No more delivery au point. Rather sales should look at a stream of accepted increments (or incremental releases) and scoup from that whatever they find valuable. Sales and marketing need to realize they should work on what´s there, not what might be possible in the future. But I digress… In my view a Spinning cycle - which is not easy to reach, which requires practice - is the core practice to compensate the immeasurability of Evolvability. From start to finish of each issue in 32 hours max - that´s the challenge we need to accept if we´re serious increasing Evolvability. Fortunately higher Evolvability is not the only outcome of Spinning. Customer/management will like the increased flexibility and “getting more bang for the buck”.

    Read the article

  • BI&EPM in Focus June 2013

    - by Mike.Hallett(at)Oracle-BI&EPM
    Analyst Report from Ovum: BI bites into a bigger slice of Oracle’s Red Stack Customers INC Research Ensures 24/7 Enterprise Application Availability and Supports Rapid Expansion in Asia with Managed Cloud Services – Hyperion Planning, PeopleSoft, E-Business Suite, SOA Suite PL Developments Improves Quality and Demand Planning Accuracy, Streamlines Compliance as It Moves into Manufacturing – Hyperion Planning, OBIEE, E-Business Suite Release 12.1, Agile, Demantra Kiabi Provides Store Managers with Monthly Earnings Statements in Four Business Days to Support Continued Retail Growth – Hyperion Planning, Hyperion Financial Reporting, Hyperion Smart View for Office Speedy Cash Improves Global Financial Budgeting and Forecasting to Support Continued Company Growth - Hyperion Planning, Essbase, Hyperion Smart View for Office, Hyperion Financial Management Grupo Sports World Automates and Reduces Budget Consolidation Time by 33% for 30 Fitness Centers – Hyperion Planning Jupiter Shop Channel Automates Budgeting Processes, Enhances Visibility of Project Investments to Support Strategic Decision-Making – Hyperion Planning GENBAND Saves US$1.25 Million Annually with Automated Global Trade Management, Gains Compliance Assurance – Hyperion Financial Management, E-Business Suite Aldar Properties Consolidates and Simplifies Group Planning and Reporting for Business and Finance Structures with Integrated ERP and Business Intelligence – Hyperion Planning, Essbase, Data Integrator, OBIEE, E-Business Suite, SUN Link to Complete Archive Enterprise Performance Management Hyperion EPM 11.1.2.3 Webcast Tutorials EPM Blog: Three Technologies CFOs Need to Know About The CFO as Catalyst for Change - Part 1 The CFO as Catalyst for Change - Part 2 Actions Speak Louder in Scorecards Unlocking Business Potential with Enterprise Performance Management Business Intelligence Oracle Database 12c is launched Analysis: How to Take Big Data Advantage of Oracle Database 12c by Data-informed.com Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}

    Read the article

  • links for 2010-04-22

    - by Bob Rhubart
    Barry N. Perkins: Unique Business Value vs. Unique IT "Some solutions may look good today, solving a budget challenge by reducing cost, or solving a specific tactical challenge, but result in highly complex environments, that may be difficult to manage and maintain and limit the future potential of your business. Put differently, some solutions might push today's challenge into the future, resulting in a more complex and expensive solution." -- Barry N. Perkins, VP Oracle Modernization & Oracle Integrated Solutions (tags: oracle otn enterprisearchitecture modernization) Paul Homchick: The Information Driven Value Chain - Part 2 Paul Homchick continues his series with a look "at the way investments have been made in enterprise software in an effort to create and manage value, and how systems are moving from a controlled-process approach design towards gathering and using dynamically using information." (tags: oracle otn enterprisearchitecture) @vambenepe: The battle of the Cloud Frameworks: Application Servers redux? "The battle of the Cloud Frameworks has started," says William Vambenepe, "and it will look a lot like the battle of the Application Servers which played out over the last decade and a half." (tags: oracle otn cloud frameworks appserver) @ORACLENERD: COLLABORATE: Day 4 Wrap Up Oraclenerd feesses up: "The day started out with the realization that I pulled off the best (COLLABORATE - self annointed) prank ever. Twitter was...all atwitter about the fact that Mark Rittman was Oracle's Person of the Year. Of course it wasn't true. If you look at the picture, you'll realize that he's wearing exactly the same clothes in the magazine cover as he is in real life." (tags: collaborate2010 oracleace) Oracle's Hal Stern at Cloud Expo: "We've Moved from 'What' to 'How'" | Cloud Computing Journal "Hal also spoke a bit about building 'a sustainable IT model.' By this, he said he didn't mean the various Green IT and similar efforts that 'are all about data center efficiency. I think the operational model is just as important. Many enterprises are managing a tremendous amount of complexity, and it's hard to make this sustainable.'" -- Cloud News Desk (tags: oracle cloud cloudexpo halstern) @ORACLENERD: COLLABORATE: The Beach Party "Then tiki statues somehow were incorporated into various dances" -- Oracle ACE Chet "oraclenerd" Justice (tags: 0racle otn oracleace collaborate2010 oaug ioug lasvegas) David Andrews: Collaborate Day Two "Collaborate 2010 has focused on helping attendees understand what is already available and how to make more effective use of it. This does not sound exciting but it is extremely valuable. Most customers use only a small fraction of the capability of the products they already own. Helping them understand all the additional things they could be doing without buying anything more is very valuable." -- David Andrews (tags: oracle oaug collaborate2010 ioug)

    Read the article

  • What are the options for hosting a small Plone site? [closed]

    - by Tina Russell
    Possible Duplicate: How to find web hosting that meets my requirements? I’ve developed a portfolio website for myself using Plone 4, and I’m looking for someplace to host it. Most Plone hosting services seem to focus on large, corporate deployments, but I need something that I can afford on a very limited budget and fits a small, single-admin website. My understanding is that my basic options are thus: I can go with a hosting service that specifically provides Plone. I know of WebFaction, but what others exist? Also, I’d have two stipulations for a Plone hosting service: (a) It needs to use Plone 4, for which I’ve developed my site, and (b) it needs to allow me SSH access to a home directory (including the Plone configuration), so that I may use my custom development eggs and such. I could use a VPS hosting service. What are my options here? Again, I need something cheap and scaled to my level. I could use Amazon EC2 or a similar service (please tell me of any) and pay by the tiniest unit of data. I’m a little scared of this because I have no idea how to do a cost-benefit analysis between this and a regular VPS host. The advantage of this approach would be that I only pay for what I use, making it very scalable, but I don’t know how the overall cost would compare to any VPS host under similar circumstances. What factors enter into the cost of Amazon EC2? What can I expect to pay under either option for regular traffic for a new website? Which one is more desirable for when a rush of visitors drive up my bandwidth bill? One last note: I know Plone isn’t common for websites for individuals, but please don’t try to talk me out of it here; that’s a completely different subject. For now, assume I’m sticking with Plone for good. Also, I have seen the Plone hosting services list on Plone.org—it’s twenty pages long, and the first page was nothing but professional Plone consulting services that sometimes offer hosting for business clients. So, that wasn’t much help. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Before the Summit of 2012

    - by Ajarn Mark Caldwell
    Today, Monday, was the first day of the PASS Summit Preconference training events, but instead I spent the day at the free SQL in the City event put on by Red Gate. For me this was not a financial decision (pre-con sessions cost extra above the general Summit registration) but rather a matter of interest.  I had already included money for pre-cons in this year’s training budget, but none of them really stood out to me, so even if the Red-Gate event were not going on at the same time, I probably would not have gone to any pre-cons this year.  However, the topics being presented at the SQL in the City event were of great interest to me.  There promised to be good information on Continuous Integration and automated deployment of database changes, which lately has been a real hot topic at my work.  And indeed, Red-Gate announced the release of a new tool (still in Early Access Program…a.k.a. Beta) which is called the Deployment Manager.  Since we are in the middle of a TFS implementation project, it will be interesting to see how this plays out and compares to what we put together with the automated builds in TFS.  But, as I understand it, the primary focus of Deployment Manager is not to be the Build process (Red Gate uses JetBrains’ Team City for that in their shop) but rather to aid in the deployment of those build packages, as well as providing easy rollback and a good visualization of which versions of software are in which environments.  It looks promising and I’ve already downloaded the installer package to play with it later. Overall, I was quite impressed with the SQL in the City event.  Having heard many current and past members of the PASS Board of Directors describe the challenges of putting on a large conference, and the growing pains that the PASS Summit has gone through, I am even more impressed that the Red Gate event ran as smoothly as it did.  And it is quite impressive the amount of money that Red Gate must have spent given that this was a no-charge event to attend, they had a very nice hot lunch, and the after-event drinks celebration.  Well done, folks! Of course it was great to hear from a variety of speakers.  Today I listened to some folks from Red Gate like Grant Fritchey (blog | @GFritchey) and David Atkinson (Product Manager for SQL Source Control and now the Deployment Manager tool set); and also Brent Ozar (blog | @BrentO) and Buck Woody (blog | @BuckWoody).  By the way, if you have never seen either Brent or Buck speak, you really should.  Different styles, but both are very entertaining and educational at the same time.  I love Buck’s sense of humor (here’s a tip…don’t be late to Buck’s session or you’ll become part of the presentation) and I praise Brent’s slides.  Brent’s style very much reminds me of that espoused by Garr Reynolds on his Presentation Zen blog (and book) and I am impressed that he can make a technical presentation so engaging. It was a great day, a great way to kick off the week, and I am excited to get into the full Summit!

    Read the article

  • Projected Results: Sound project management practices, combined with a complete technology platform, have an immediate and lasting impact on an organization’s bottom line.

    - by Melissa Centurio Lopes
    Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} Article By: Alan Joch, is a business and technology writer who specializes in enterprise applications, cloud computing, mobile computing, and the Web. It’s no secret that complex, large-scale projects need close management controls to ensure that they’re delivered on time and on budget. But now there’s growing evidence that failing to meet these goals can have far-reaching consequences, not only for the reputations and value of individual organizations but also for the tenure of their top executives. Government watchdogs forced one large contractor to suspend a multibillion-dollar defense program—and delay payment receipts—until a better management system was launched to more accurately track spending, project milestones, and other fundamental metrics. Significant delays in the opening of the £4.3 billion Terminal 5 at Heathrow Airport impaired an airline’s operations and contributed to a drop in its share prices. These real-world examples are noteworthy because of the huge financial risks they created. They’re also far from being isolated cases. Research by the Economist Intelligence Unit found that only 11 percent of companies claimed they delivered expected ROI on major capital projects 90 percent of the time or more. In addition, 12 percent of respondents said they achieved planned ROI less than half the time. According to Phil Thornton, lead consultant at the analyst firm Clarity Economics, the numbers demonstrate obvious challenges related to managing risks, accurately predicting ROI, and consistently delivering bottom-line growth for major capital investments “Portfolio management is a path to improve your organization’s competitive advantage. It helps make sure your organization is investing in the right things and not spending its time on things that are not delivering the intended results for the firm.” Read the full article here

    Read the article

  • How to convince my boss that quality is a good thing to have in code?

    - by Kristof Claes
    My boss came to me today to ask me if we could implement a certain feature in 1.5 days. I had a look at it and told him that 2 to 3 days would be more realistic. He then asked me: "And what if we do it quick and dirty?" I asked him to explain what he meant with "quick and dirty". It turns out, he wants us to write code as quickly as humanly possible by (for example) copying bits and pieces from other projects, putting all code in the code-behind of the WebForms pages, stop caring about DRY and SOLID and assuming that the code and functionalities will never ever have to be modified or changed. What's even worse, he doesn't want us do it for just this one feature, but for all the code we write. We can make more profit when we do things quick and dirty. Clients don't want to pay for you taking into account that something might change in the future. The profits for us are in delivering code as quick as possible. As long as the application does what it needs to do, the quality of the code doesn't matter. They never see the code. I have tried to convince him that this is a bad way to think as the manager of a software company, but he just wouldn't listen to my arguments: Developer motivation: I explained that it is hard to keep developers motivated when they are constantly under pressure of unrealistic deadlines and budget to write sloppy code very quickly. Readability: When a project gets passed on to another developer, cleaner and better structured code will be easier to read and understand. Maintainability: It is easier, safer and less time consuming to adapt, extend or change well written code. Testability: It is usually easier to test and find bugs in clean code. My co-workers are as baffled as I am by my boss' standpoint, but we can't seem to get to him. He keeps on saying that by making things more quickly, we can sell more projects, ask a lower price for them while still making a bigger profit. And in the end these projects pay the developer's salaries. What more can I say to make him see he is wrong? I want to buy him copies of Peopleware and The Mythical Man-Month, but I have a feeling they won't change his mind either. A lot of you will probably say something like "Run! Get out of there now!" or "I'd quit!", but that's not really an option since .NET web development jobs are rather rare in the region where I live...

    Read the article

  • Leading an offshore team

    - by Chuck Conway
    I'm in a position where I am leading two teams of 4. Both teams are located in India. I am on the west coast of the U.S. I'm finding leading remote teams challenging: First, their command of the English language is weak. Second, I'm having difficultly understanding them through their accents. Third is timing, we are 12 hours apart. We use Skype to communicate. I have a month to get the project done. We've burned through a week just setting up the environments. At this point I'm considering working their hours, 11p PDT to 7a PDT, to get them up to speed, so that I can get the project off the ground. A 12 hour lag time is too much. I'm looking for steps I can take to be successful at leading an offshore team. Update The offshore team's primary task is coding, of course, most coding tasks do involve some design work. The offshore team's are composed of one lead, 2 mid level (4 to 5 years) developers and a junior (~2 years) developer. The project is classic waterfall. We've handed the offshore team a business and a technical design document. We are trying to manage the offshore in an agile way. We have daily conference calls with them and I'm requiring the teams to send me a daily scrum in the form of an email answering the following questions: What did I do today? What am I going to do tomorrow? What do I need from Chuck so I can do my job tomorrow? There is some ambiguity in the tasks. The intent was to give them enough direction for them to develop the task with out writing the code for them. I don't have a travel budget. I am using Fogbugz to track the tasks. Each task has been entered into Fogbugz and given a priority. Each team member has access to FogBugz and can choose what task they wish to complete. Related question: What can we do to improve the way outsourcing/offshoring works? Update 2 I've decided that I can not talk to the team once a day. I must work with them. Starting tonight I've started working the same hours they are. This makes me available to them when they have questions. It also allows me to gain their trust and respect. Stackoverflow question Leading an offshore team

    Read the article

  • Windows Desktop Virtualization Gets Easier

    - by andrewbrust
    This past Thursday, Microsoft announced that Windows (7) Virtual PC (WVPC) and its XP Mode feature would no longer require hardware assisted virtualization (HAV).  That means any PC running Windows 7 Pro, or higher, can now run this software.  And that’s a great thing because, as I noted in a post almost five month ago, determining whether a given PC you might be planning to buy actually offers HAV can be extremely difficult.  That meant even dedicated, sophisticated PC users, with a budget for new hardware, might be blocked from using this technology.  And that was just plain silly. One of the features offered by WVPC, and utilized heavily by XP Mode, is the concept of virtual applications: apps within a guest VM that can actually run within the host’s desktop environment.  I find this feature so powerful that my February Redmond Review column entertained the notion of a future version of Windows that runs all applications in this manner. The elimination of the HAV requirement for XP Mode and WVPC was just one of many virtualization-related announcements Microsoft made on Thursday.  And, interestingly, most of the others were also desktop-related, rather than server-related.  This is a welcome change from the multi-year period in which Microsoft enhanced its server virtualization lineup (in Hyper-V) and let the desktop platform fester.  Microsoft now seems to understand desktop virtualization is in high-demand and strengthens the Windows franchise.  As I explained in the column, even cloud computing can have a desktop spin if desktop virtualization is part of the equation. One company that knows this well is Citrix, and a closer alliance between Microsoft and Citrix was one of the many announcements from Thursday.  In fact, there’s a whole Web site dedicated to the alliance at http://www.citrixandmicrosoft.com/. I’d love to see virtual applications and entire virtual desktops offered as Azure-branded services.  This could allow me to run, for example, the full Office client on a variety of desktops I might use, and for large organizations it could easily reduce the expense, burden and duration of the deployment cycle for new versions of Office.  Business Intelligence providers, including my own firm, twentysix New York, would find great relief in enabling their customers to run the newest version of Excel, with the latest BI capabilities, instead of having to wait the requisite two to three years it takes for many Fortune 500 customers to upgrade. Microsoft should do more, and faster.  WVPC still does not support 64-bit guest images, even on 64-bit hosts.  That needs to be fixed.  File access from the guest to the host needs to be improved (right now, it’s done through Terminal Services/Remote Desktop file sharing, and it’s slow) and VM load times need to be significantly reduced before virtualized apps can become the norm.  (I suppose the advance of solid state drive technology will help there.) I do think these improvements will come, because Microsoft is focused on the virtual desktop now.  And that’s a smart focus to have.

    Read the article

  • What if you could work on anything you wanted?

    - by red@work
    This week we've downed our tools and organised ourselves into small project teams or struck out alone. We're working on whatever we like, with whoever we like, wherever we like. We've called it Down Tools week and so far it's a blast. It all started a few months ago with an idea from Neil, our CEO. Neil wanted to capture the excitement, innovation, and productivity of Coding by the Sea and extend this to all Red Gaters working in Product Development. A brainstorm is always a good place to start for an "anything goes" project. Half of Red Gate piled into our largest meeting room (it's pretty big) armed with flip charts, post its and a heightened sense of possibility. An hour or so later our SQL Servery walls were covered in project ideas. So what would you do, if you could work on anything you wanted? Many projects are related to tools we already make, others are for internal product development use and some are, well, just something completely different. Someone suggested we point a web cam at the SQL Servery lunch queue so we can check it before heading to lunch. That one couldn't wait for Down Tools Week. It was up and running within a few days and even better, it captures the table tennis table too. Thursday is the Show and Tell - I am looking forward to seeing what everyone has come up with. Some of the projects will turn into new products or features so this probably isn't the time or place to go into detail of what is being worked on. Rest assured, you'll hear all about it! We're making a video as we go along too which will be up on our website as soon. In the meantime, all meetings are cancelled, we've got plenty of food in and people are being very creative with the £500 expenses budget (Richard, do you really need an iPad?). It's brilliant to see it all coming together from the idea stage to reality. Catch up with our progress by following #downtoolsweek on Twitter. Who knows, maybe a future Red Gate flagship tool is coming to life right now? By the way, it's business as usual for our customer facing and internal operations teams. Hmm, maybe we can all down tools for a week and ask Product Development to hold the fort? Post by: Alice Chapman

    Read the article

  • BI&EPM in Focus April 2012

    - by Mike.Hallett(at)Oracle-BI&EPM
    General News Oracle OpenWorld call for papers now open, now through April 9 (link) Oracle Announces Availability of Oracle Exalytics In-Memory Machine (link) Oracle EPM and BI Support Newsletter Current Edition - Volume 3 : March 2012 (link) Customers Asiana Airlines Improves Passenger Management with Near-Real-Time Reservation and Ticketing Information  Centraal Boekhuis Delivers Faster with Oracle BI 11g Essatto Software Speeds Data Aggregation Tenfold; Integrates BI, Performance Management, and Data Warehousing for Midsize Businesses Grupo WTorre Supports Management's Decision-Making with OBIEE, Ensuring Uniform, Reliable, and Consistent Data Indian Overseas Bank Cuts Planning Schedule by 45 Worker Days per Year, Assesses Market Risk Instantly with Business Intelligence System Kentucky Community and Technical College System Enables Data-Driven Decision-Making Using Integrated System with Management Dashboards National Australia Bank Achieves 200% ROI, Improves Data Quality and Reporting Integrity with Oracle Hyperion DRM R.L. Polk & Co. Enhances Business Intelligence Capabilities, Optimizes System Performance with Extreme Analytics Machine Test ResCare, Inc. Transforms Reporting to Improve Healthcare Service Performance with Oracle Business Analytics  Rochester City School District Uses OBIEE to Track Student Achievement, Identify Areas for Improvement, Accelerate Reporting  Société Générale Standardizes, Accelerates, and Improves Budget Planning Accuracy across Global Enterprise The State Accounting Office of Georgia Integrates Financial Information, Shortens Financial Closings and Streamlines Reporting across 175 Organizations   Events 4-day Oracle Real-Time Decisions Hands-on Technical Workshop for Partners (PTS, Free) May 14-17, 2012: Colombes, Paris, France Nordic events : “Latest Release of Oracle Hyperion EPM and BI Suites Helps Organizations Plan through Uncertainty, Improve Decision-Making and Meet Regulatory Requirements” (April 17, Sweden | April 18, Norway | April 19, Denmark | April 24, Finland) Webcast Replay from Balaji Yelamanchili and Paul Rodwick: “Analytics Without Limits - The Latest on Oracle Exalytics In-Memory Machine and Oracle Business Intelligence”  (link)  Wednesday, April 04, 2012: Business Analytics launch webcast: Invite your customers to register (link) Big Data Online Forum now available on Demand (link)  Enterprise Performance Management Webcast Replay: Accurate Forecasting within the Business Planning Cycle (link) Oracle Hyperion Profitability and Cost Management (HPCM) Master Support Note (link) Business  Intelligence Whitepaper: Driving Innovation Through Analytics (link) Gartner: CIOs Identify BI as the No. 1 Technology Priority for 2012 (link) Webcast Replay: Exalytics in Action: Airlines, US Census and Federal Spending Demo Applications  (link) NEWLY RELEASED Walk-in Video for Exalytics - Use This to Start Customer/Partner Meetings! (link) IDC Insight Paper: “Oracle's All-Out Assault on the Big Data Market: Offering Hadoop, R, Cubes, and Scalable IMDB in Familiar Packages” (link) System Requirements and Supported Platforms for Oracle Business Intelligence Suite Enterprise Edition 11gR1 Certification Matrix now published to include OBIEE 11.1.1.6.0 (link) Maintenance Release Guide (List of Bugs Fixed) for Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (OBIEE) 11.1.1.6.0  (link) OBIEE 11.1.1.6: Is OBIEE 11.1.1.6 Certified With OBI Apps 7.9.6.3?  (link) Information Center: Troubleshooting Oracle Business Intelligence Applications (support login req'd)  (link)      

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >