Search Results

Search found 3211 results on 129 pages for 'david mackey'.

Page 3/129 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Oracle 'In Touch' PartnerCast – Neues von der Oracle OpenWorld

  - by Alliances & Channels Redaktion

  Kurz nach den vielen interessanten Ankündigungen auf der Oracle OpenWorld sind alle Oracle EMEA Partner herzlich eingeladen, an dem „In Touch“-Partnerwebcast mit David Callaghan, Senior Vice President EMEA Alliances and Channels, und seinen Studiogästen teilzunehmen. Am Dienstag, 29. Oktober, um 11:30 Uhr MEZ informiert Sie David Callaghan über die neuesten Entwicklungen rund um die Oracle Cloud und Oracle Hardware. Er wird die Key Partner Wins aus dem ersten Quartal vorstellen sowie Ihre Fragen an seine Studiogäste weiterleiten. Live im Studio dabei ist Will O'Brien, Vice President Alliances & Channels, UK & Irland, der über die Highlights der Oracle OpenWorld berichtet und die Relevanz von Storage für das Software Business erläutert. David Callaghan wird Will O’Brien zu seiner neuen Rolle interviewen und ihn nach seinen obersten Prioritäten für FY14 befragen. Markus Reischl, Senior Director und Sales Leader EMEA Strategic Alliances, stellt die Updates in Business Intelligence vor und berichtet darüber, wie diese das gesamte Oracle Portfolio beeinflussen und welche Chancen dies für die Partner bringt. Registrieren Sie sich hier für den Webcast. Über Fragen an die Studiogäste freut sich David Callaghan. Kontaktieren Sie ihn über Twitter mit dem Hashtag #DCpickme oder per E-Mail [email protected]. Mehr Informationen über diesen sowie frühere Webcasts on-demand finden Sie hier auf der neuen Website.

  Read the article

• I finished my #TechEd 2010, may I have another??

  - by T

  It has been another fantastic year for TechEd North America.  I always love my time here.  First, I have to give a huge thank you to Ineta for giving me the opportunity to work the Ineta booth and BOF’s (birds of a feather).   I can not even begin to list how many fantastic leaders in the .Net space and Developers from all over I have met through Ineta at this event.  It has been truly amazing and great fun!! New Orlean’s has been awesome.  The night life is hoppin’.  In addition to enjoying a few (too many??) of the local hurricanes in New Orleans, I have hung out with some of the coolest people  Deepesh Mohnani, David Poll, Viresh, Alan Stephens, Shawn Wildermuth, Greg Leonardo, Doug Seven, Chris Willams, David Carley and some of our southcentral hero’s Jeffery Palermo, Todd Anglin, Shawn Weisfeld, Randy Walker, The midnight DBA’s, Zeeshan Hirani, Dennis Bottjer just to name a few. A big thanks to Microsoft and everyone that has helped to put TechEd together.  I have loved hanging out with people from the Silverlight and Expression Teams and have learned a ton.  I am ramped up and ready to take all that knowledge back to my co-workers and my community. I can not wait to see you all again next year in Atlanta!!! Here are video links to some of my fav sessions: Using MVVM Design Pattern with VS 2010 XAML Designer – Rockford Lhotka Effective RIA: Tips and Tricks for Building Effective Rich Internet Applications – Deepesh Mohani Taking Microsoft Silverlight 4 Applications Beyond the Browser – David Poll Jump into Silvelright! and become immediately effective – Tim Huckaby Prototyping Rich Microsoft Silverlight 4 Applications with MS Expression Blend + SketchFlow – David Carley Tales from the Trenches: Building a Real-World Microsoft Silvelright Line-of-Business Application – Dan Wahlin

  Read the article

• When to favor webforms over MVC

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I know Microsoft has said "MVC is not a replacement for webforms". Some developers say webforms is faster to develop than MVC, but I believe this all comes down to comfort level with the technology; so I don't want any answers in this direction. Given that MVC gives a developer more control over our application, why is webforms not considered obsolete? When should I favor webforms over MVC for new development?

  Read the article

• Coordinates from 3DS Max to XNA 3.5

  - by David Conde

  Hello My problem is this. I have a simple box made in 3DS Max 2009, the Box is 10x10x10. I've tried to load it on XNA and traslate the camera for 15 units, but I can seem to find the values needed to see the box properly. Can anyone point me to a good resource where I can find some good introduction to XNA coordinate system and how is a simple box made in 3DS Max imported properly Best regards, David

  Read the article

• Microsoft TechDays Canada 2010

  - by David Nudelman

  John Oxley announced that TechDays is returning to Canada in more cities then ever in 2010. Vancouver – September 14/15 at the Vancouver Convention Centre Edmonton – October 5/6 at the Shaw Conference Centre Toronto – October 27/28 at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre Halifax – November 2/3 at the World Trade & Convention Centre Ottawa – November 9/10 at the Hampton Inn & Conference Centre Montreal – November 23/24 at the Palais de Congres Winnipeg – December 7/8 at the Winnipeg Convention Centre Calgary – December 14/15 at the Calgary Stampede Get all the info here Regards, David Nudelman

  Read the article

• When to favor ASP.NET WebForms over MVC

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I know Microsoft has said "ASP.NET MVC is not a replacement for WebForms". Some developers say WebForms is faster to develop than MVC, but I believe this all comes down to comfort level with the technology; so I don't want any answers in this direction. Given that ASP.NET MVC gives a developer more control over our application, why is WebForms not considered obsolete? When should I favor WebForms over MVC for new development?

  Read the article

• Does waterfall require code complete before QA steps in?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  The process used at a certain company consists of: Create a layout according to some designs made in a web page design tool. (CSS, html) Requirements come in with "functional requirements". These consist of 100's of lines of business directions. E.G. Create a Table on page X. Column1 has numeric data. Column1 is the client code. Column2 is a string...etc. Write code to meet all functional requirements. When all code is checked in, send to QA (which is the BA that wrote the requirements) for inspection, bug finds and change requests. Punt back to developer with a list of X bugs and Y change requests. While bug finds or change requests 0 go to step 4. The agile development environments I have worked in allow, if not demand, early QA inspection and early user acceptance. So, pieces of the program can be refined and redefined before the entire application is in place. Not only that, but the process leaves little room for error or people changing their minds. Instead, those "change requests" come in at the last stage when they do the most damage. And being that a bug-fix's cost increases over time, this is a costly way to write code. I am no waterfall expert. As described, is this waterfall being mishandled in some way? How does waterfall address my concerns?

  Read the article

• How can I convince cowboy programmers to use source control?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  UPDATE I work on a small team of devs, 4 guys. They have all used source control. Most of them can't stand source control and instead choose not to use it. I strongly believe source control is a necessary part of professional development. Several issues make it very difficult to convince them to use source control: The team is not used to using TFS. I've had 2 training sessions, but was only allotted 1 hour which is insufficient. Team members directly modify code on the server. This keeps code out of sync. Requiring comparison just to be sure you are working with the latest code. And complex merge problems arise Time estimates offered by developers exclude time required to fix any of these problems. So, if I say nono it will take 10x longer...I have to constantly explain these issues and risk myself because now management may perceive me as "slow". The physical files on the server differ in unknown ways over ~100 files. Merging requires knowledge of the project at hand and, therefore, developer cooperation which I am not able to obtain. Other projects are falling out of sync. Developers continue to have a distrust of source control and therefore compound the issue by not using source control. Developers argue that using source control is wasteful because merging is error prone and difficult. This is a difficult point to argue, because when source control is being so badly mis-used and source control continually bypassed, it is error prone indeed. Therefore, the evidence "speaks for itself" in their view. Developers argue that directly modifying server code, bypassing TFS saves time. This is also difficult to argue. Because the merge required to synchronize the code to start with is time consuming. Multiply this by the 10+ projects we manage. Permanent files are often stored in the same directory as the web project. So publishing (full publish) erases these files that are not in source control. This also drives distrust for source control. Because "publishing breaks the project". Fixing this (moving stored files out of the solution subfolders) takes a great deal of time and debugging as these locations are not set in web.config and often exist across multiple code points. So, the culture persists itself. Bad practice begets more bad practice. Bad solutions drive new hacks to "fix" much deeper, much more time consuming problems. Servers, hard drive space are extremely difficult to come by. Yet, user expectations are rising. What can be done in this situation?

  Read the article

• Is there a resource that explains the benefits of layered programming?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  Some developers I know favor what I would call a procedural programming style. I recognize that procedural programming has its uses, albeit not in the business application world of .NET programming. So let's say we have a winform application with a buttonclick event. The buttonclick handles everything from the UI configuration to the database call and data manipulation. So you end up with a method that is 100's of lines of code long. Outside the fact that this code can't be considered test-able for various reasons, this style of programming is fragile to change. I can talk bout OO, Anti-patterns, etc. The problem is that any distinct topic I can dream up requires a great deal of explanation to understand the potential benefits. Outside of finding a new job (lots of businesses program this way), how can I teach these kinds of developers how to write better code? Obviously we can't sit around a round table and discuss pro's and con's all day due to time constraints and real work that has to be done. Although, training and intense training is the only thing I can think of to fix these problems. Not to say I write perfect code, I most certainly do not. I do believe there are certain best practices that should be followed as a rule E.G. OO in the context of .NET. The most common excuse I hear is "we can't write code fast enough if we do it like that".

  Read the article

• Can a programmer get too smart for their own good?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  The more I learn about programming, the more things I see that could be improved by a great deal. Often, a companies process management is total SWAG or they have Frames based websites written recently, .NET 1.1 based code, no separation of concerns, poor quality control...I could go on and on and on... Projects can succeed, but there tends to be so much waste I am amazed at how much time and money a company can throw away. I've seen it happen at several companies. So is it that ignorance truly is bliss? UPDATE Question "How is it that top developers (I don't mean like Jon Skeet level, I mean guys who are dedicated enough to hit a forum and try for self-improvement) even want to code anymore after they see the often insurmountable sociological and technical problems they are told to fix, but then scolded for doing so? "

  Read the article

• What are the best practices for phasing out obsolete code?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I have the need to phase out an obsolete method. I am aware of the [Obsolete] attribute. Does Microsoft have a recommended best practice guide for doing this? Here's my current plan: A. I do not want to create a new assembly because developers would have to add a new reference to their projects and I expect to get a lot of grief from my boss and co-workers if they must do this. We also do not maintain multiple assembly versions. We only use the latest version. Changing this practice would require changing our deployment process which is a big issue (have to teach people how to do things with TFS instead of FinalBuilder and get them to give up FinalBuilder) B. Mark the old method obsolete. C. Because the implementation is changing (not the method signature), I need to rename the method rather than create an overload. So, to make users aware of the proper method I plan to add a message to the [Obsolete] attribute. This part bothers me, because the only change I'm making is decoupling the method from the connection string. But, because I'm not adding a new assembly, I see no way around this. Result: [Obsolete("Please don't use this anymore because it does not implement IMyDbProvider. Use XXX instead.")]; /// <summary> /// /// </summary> /// <param name="settingName"></param> /// <returns></returns> public static Dictionary<string, Setting> ReadSettings(string settingName) { return ReadSettings(settingName, SomeGeneralClass.ConnectionString); } public Dictionary<string, Setting> ReadSettings2(string settingName) { return ReadSettings(settingName);// IMyDbProvider.ConnectionString private member added to class. Probably have to make this an instance method. }

  Read the article

• What is the best way to design a table with an arbitrary id?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I have the need to create a table with a unique id as the PK. The ID is a surrogate key. Originally, I had a natural key, but requirement changes have undermined this idea. Then, I considered adding an auto incrementing identity. But, this presents problems. A. I can't specify my own ID. B. The ID's are difficult to reset. Both of these together make it difficult to copy over this table with new data or move the table across domains, e.g. Dev to QA. I need to refer to these ID's from the front end, JavaScript...so they must not change. So, the only way I am aware of to meet all these challenges is to make a GUID ID. This way, I can overwrite the ID's when I need to or I can generate a new one without concern for order (E.G. an int based id would require I know the last inserted ID). Is a GUID the best way to accomplish my goals? Considering that a GUID is a string and joining on a string is an expensive task, is there a better way?

  Read the article

• What's the best project management software for internal dev. 5 man shop

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I work for a large corporation, but we do small intranet web application development. Our project management tracking sucks. Its custom software built by a jr. intern. For what its worth, our development style is akin to agile, but there's nothing set in stone...very customer oriented approach. I need project tracking that meets the criteria: Intranet, internal products. Mostly maintenance, some new development. 5 developers 12 products 1 hands-off manager. He really just wants to know estimated man hours, due date for dev, QA and release. Along with a short description of the project. Free or super cheap. Bonus Simple pretty UI. Think pretty charts. Hope I covered everything. Please ask for any clarification. If you read dreaming in code, the company uses some project tracking software that sounds pretty sweet. Note, we do have Team Foundation Server. I already tried pushing its use as PM tracking, but its too complicated. I can't get people to sit and train. So this software has to be easy.

  Read the article

• Should a programmer "think" for the client?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I have gotten to the point where I hate requirements gathering. Customer's are too vague for their own good. In an agile environment, where we can show the client a piece of work to completion it's not too bad as we can make small regular corrections/updates to functionality. In a "waterfall" type in environment (requirements first, nearly complete product next) things can get ugly. This kind of environment has led me to constantly question requirements. E.G. Customer wants "automatically convert input to the number 1" (referring to a Qty in an order). But what they don't think about is that "input" could be a simple type-o. An "x" in a textbox could be a "woops" not I want 1 of those "toothpaste" products. But, there's so much in the air with requirements that I could stand and correct for hours on end smashing out what they want. This just isn't healthy. Working for a corporation, I could try to adjust the culture to fit the agile model that would help us (no small job, above my pay grade). Or, sweep ugly details under the rug and hope for the best. Maybe my customer is trying to get too close to the code? How does one handle the problem of "thinking for the client" without pissing them off with too many questions?

  Read the article

• Why is prefixing column names considered bad practice?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  According to a popular SO post is it considered a bad practice to prefix table names. At my company every column is prefixed by a table name. This is difficult for me to read. I'm not sure the reason, but this naming is actually the company standard. I can't stand the naming convention, but I have no documentation to back up my reasoning. All I know is that reading AdventureWorks is much simpler. In this our company DB you will see a table, Person and it might have column name: Person_First_Name or maybe even Person_Person_First_Name (don't ask me why you see person 2x) Why is it considered a bad practice to pre-fix column names? Are underscores considered evil in SQL as well? Note: I own Pro SQL Server 2008 - Relation Database design and implementation. References to that book are welcome.

  Read the article

• Automated architecture validation

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I am aware of the fact that TFS 2010 ultimate edition can create and validate architecture diagrams. For example, I can create a new modeling project add Layer Diagram Add Layer called View Add BL Layer Add DL layer. Then I can validate this architecture as part of the build process when someone tries to check code into TFS. In other words, if the View references the DL then the compilation process will fail and the checkin will not be allowed. For those without an MSDN ultimate license, can FxCop or some 3rd party utility be used to validate architecture in an automated fashion? I prefer a TFS install-able plugin, but a local VS plugin will do.

  Read the article

• Pros and cons of hosted scripts

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I have seen some developers use hosted scripts to link their libraries. cdn.jquerytools.org is one example. I have also seen people complain that a hosted script link has been hijacked. How safe is using hosted scripts in reality? Are the scripts automatically updated? For example, if jQuery 5 goes to 6 do I automatically get version 6 or do I need to update my link? I also see that Google has a large set of these scripts setup for hosting. What are the pros and cons?

  Read the article

• What do you do when practical problems get in the way of practical goals?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  UPDATE Source control is good to use. Sometimes, real world issues make it impractical to use. For example: If the team is not used to using source control, training problems can arise If a team member directly modifies code on the server, various issues can arise. Merge problems, lack of history, etc Let's say there's a project that is way out of sync. The physical files on the server differ in unknown ways over ~100 files. Merging would take not only a great knowledge of the project, but is also well beyond the ability to complete in the given time. Other projects are falling out of sync. Developers continue to have a distrust of source control and therefore compound the issue by not using source control. Developers argue that using source control is wasteful because merging is error prone and difficult. This is a difficult point to argue, because when source control is being so badly mis-used and source control continually bypassed, it is error prone indeed. Therefore, the evidence "speaks for itself" in their view. Developers argue that directly modifying source control saves time. This is also difficult to argue. Because the merge required to synchronize the code to start with is time consuming, across ~10 projects. Permanent files are often stored in the same directory as the web project. So publishing (full publish) erases these files that are not in source control. This also drives distrust for source control. Because "publishing breaks the project". Fixing this (moving stored files out of the solution subfolders) takes a great deal of time and debugging as these locations are not set in web.config and often exist across multiple code points. So, the culture persists itself. Bad practice begets more bad practice. Bad solutions drive new hacks to "fix" much deeper, much more time consuming problems. Servers, hard drive space are extremly difficult to come by. Yet, user expectations are rising. What can be done in this situation?

  Read the article

• Why does a computer science degree matter to a professional programmer?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I have a degree in computer science. It has been great for opening doors, getting a job. As far as helping me in the professional field of C# .NET programming (the most popular platform and language in the area I work if not the entire united states on hands down the most popular OS in the world) its hardly useful. Why do you think it helps you as a programmer in your professional career (outside spouting off to prims algorithm to impress some interviewer)? In today's world adaptation, a quick mind, strong communication, OO and fundamental design skills enable a developer to write software that a customer will accept. These skills are only skimmed over in the cs program. In my mind, reading a 500 page C# book by Wrox offers far more useable a skillset than 4 years of the comp sci math blaster courses. Many disagree. So, why does a computer science degree matter?

  Read the article

• Does MS create cross browser compatibility problems on purpose? [closed]

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  IE does some weird **. E.G. Supporting the send() method in AJAX with no params. Poor support for XML (well IE9 I've heard things are alot better), but seriously...since MS owned such a huge market share on browsers were they intentionally dropping in problems like this and making it easy to write crap code to give the impression that competing browsers suck to the layman? Update I realize Javascript's limitations caused some of the Xcompatibility problems. I have read comments from Douglas Crockford regarding how javascript was rushed and exploded in popularity before its time...resulting in some of the issues he can't fix. I'm only concerned specifically about MS's intentions...problems they could have fixed, yet did not. Did any of you work on the IE team or know of articles discussing some details?

  Read the article

• Is there an antipattern to describe this method of coding?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I have a codebase where the programmer tended to wrap things up in areas that don't make sense. For example, given an Error log we have you can log via ErrorLog.Log(ex, "friendly message"); He added various other means to accomplish the exact same task. E.G. SomeClass.Log(ex, "friendly message"); Which simply turns around and calls the first method. This adds levels of complexity with no added benefit. Is there an anti-pattern to describe this?

  Read the article

• Layers - Logical seperation vs physical

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  Some programmers recommend logical seperation of layers over physical. For example, given a DL, this means we create a DL namespace not a DL assembly. Benefits include: faster compilation time simpler deployment Faster startup time for your program Less assemblies to reference Im on a small team of 5 devs. We have over 50 assemblies to maintain. IMO this ratio is far from ideal. I prefer an extreme programming approach. Where if 100 assemblies are easier to maintain than 10,000...then 1 assembly must be easier than 100. Given technical limits, we should strive for < 5 assemblies. New assemblies are created out of technical need not layer requirements. Developers are worried for a few reasons. A. People like to work in their own environment so they dont step on eachothers toes. B. Microsoft tends to create new assemblies. E.G. Asp.net has its own DLL, so does winforms. Etc. C. Devs view this drive for a common assembly as a threat. Some team members Have a tendency to change the common layer without regard for how it will impact dependencies. My personal view: I view A. as silos, aka cowboy programming and suggest we implement branching to create isolation. C. First, that is a human problem and we shouldnt create technical work arounds for human behavior. Second, my goal is not to put everything in common. Rather, I want partitions to be made in namespaces not assemblies. Having a shared assembly doesnt make everything common. I want the community to chime in and tell me if Ive gone off my rocker. Is a drive for a single assembly or my viewpoint illogical or otherwise a bad idea?

  Read the article

• What is the standard for naming variables and why?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  I'm going through some training on objective-c. The trainer suggests setting single character parameter names. The .NET developer in me is crying. Is this truly the convention? Why? For example, @interface Square : NSObject { int size; } -(void)setSize: (int)s; I've seen developers using underscores int _size to declar variables (I think people call the variable declared in @interface ivar for some unknown reason). Personally, I prefer to use descriptive names. E.G. @interface Square : NSObject { int Size; } -(void)setSize: (int)size; C, like C# is case sensitive. So why don't we use the same convention as .NET?

  Read the article

• Upgraded to Ubuntu 12.04--keyboard & mouse no longer work--system down!

  - by Mackey Morgan

  I upgraded from Ubuntu 11 to 12.04, today, and everything seemed to go smoothly up to, and including the reboot. However, I now find that my mouse and keyboard no longer function, so I cannot login or otherwise use my computer. I have read other posts on this topic, but most of the answers seem to require the use of a keyboard to implement the solution--and I can't use my keyboard! I downloaded a 12.04 LiveCD and tried booting from it, but I have the same issue with that--no keyboard! My systems is a Lenovo with an AMD64 dual processor, and my keyboard and mouse are USB attached and shared with two other Windows PCs via a KVM switch (so I no the keyboard and mouse work!). I would appreciate some hints about how to make this PC usable, again. Thanks!

  Read the article

• SQL Why is prefixing column names considered bad practice?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  According to a popular SO post is it considered a bad practice to prefix table names. At my company every column is prefixed by a table name. This is difficult for me to read. I'm not sure the reason, but this naming is actually the company standard. I can't stand the naming convention, but I have no documentation to back up my reasoning. All I know is that reading AdventureWorks is much simpler. In this our company DB you will see a table, Person and it might have column name: Person_First_Name or maybe even Person_Person_First_Name (don't ask me why you see person 2x) Why is it considered a bad practice to pre-fix column names? Are underscores considered evil in SQL as well? Note: I own Pro SQL Server 2008 - Relation Database design and implementation. References to that book are welcome.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >