Search Results

Search found 2466 results on 99 pages for 'ea organization'.

Page 3/99 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Organization standards for large programs

    - by Chronicide
    I'm the only software developer at the company where I work. I was hired straight out of college, and I've been working here for several years. When I started, eveeryone was managing their own data as they saw fit (lots of filing cabinets). Until recently, I've only been tasked with small standalone projects to help with simple workflows. In the beginning of the year I was asked to make a replacement for their HR software. I used SQL Server, Entity Framework, WPF, along with MVVM and Repository/Unit of work patterns. It was a huge hit. I was very happy with how it went, and it was a very solid program. As such, my employer asked me to expand this program into a corporate dashboard that tracks all of their various corporate data domains (People, Salary, Vehicles/Assets, Statistics, etc.) I use integrated authentication, and due to the initial HR build, I can map users to people in positions, so I know who is who when they open the program, and I can show each person a customized dashboard given their work functions. My concern is that I've never worked on such a large project. I'm planning, meeting with end users, developing, documenting, testing and deploying it on my own. I'm part way through the second addition, and I'm seeing that my code is getting disorganized. It's still programmed well, I'm just struggling with the organization of namespaces, classes and the database model. Are there any good guidelines to follow that will help me keep everything straight? As I have it now, I have folders for Data, Repositories/Unit of Work, Views, View Models, XAML Resources and Miscellaneous Utilities. Should I make parent folders for each data domain? Should I make separate EF models per domain instead of the one I have for the entire database? Are there any standards out there for organizing large programs that span multiple data domains? I would appreciate any suggestions.

    Read the article

  • Managing Matrix Relationships: Organization Visualization and Navigation

    - by Nancy Estell Zoder
    v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} Normal 0 false false false false EN-US 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:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 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;} Oracle is pleased to announce the posting of our latest feature, Matrix Relationship Administration. Our continued investment in our Organization Visualization and Navigation solution is demonstrated with the release of Matrix Relationship Administration as well as the enhancements made to our Org Viewer capabilities. Some of those enhancements include the ability to export to Excel and Visio, Search, Zoom, as well as the addition of Manager Self Service transactions. Matrix relationships are relationships defined by rules or ad hoc. These relationships can include, but are not limited to, product or project affiliations, functional groups including multi dimensional relationships such as when the product, region or even the customer is the profit center. The PeopleSoft solution will enable you to configure how you work in this multi dimensional world to ensure you have the tools to be productive……. For more information, please check out the datasheet available on oracle.com, video on the feature on YouTube or contact your sales representative.

    Read the article

  • How to Set Up Your Enterprise Social Organization

    - by Mike Stiles
    The rush for business organizations to establish, grow, and adopt social was driven out of necessity and inevitability. The result, however, was a sudden, booming social presence creating touch points with customers, partners and influencers, but without any corporate social organization or structure in place to effectively manage it. Even today, many business leaders remain uncertain as to how to corral this social media thing so that it makes sense for their enterprise. Imagine their panic when they hear one of the most beneficial approaches to corporate use of social involves giving up at least some hierarchical control and empowering employees to publicly engage customers. And beyond that, they should also be empowered, regardless of their corporate status, to engage and collaborate internally, spurring “off the grid” innovation. An HBR blog points out that traditionally, enterprise organizations function from the top down, and employees work end-to-end, structured around business processes. But the social enterprise opens up structures that up to now have not exactly been embraced by turf-protecting executives and managers. The blog asks, “What if leaders could create a future where customers, associates and suppliers are no longer seen as objects in the system but as valued sources of innovation, ideas and energy?” What if indeed? The social enterprise activates internal resources without the usual obsession with position. It is the dawn of mass collaboration. That does not, however, mean this mass collaboration has to lead to uncontrolled chaos. In an extended interview with Oracle, Altimeter Group analyst Jeremiah Owyang and Oracle SVP Reggie Bradford paint a complete picture of today’s social enterprise, including internal organizational structures Altimeter Group has seen emerge. One sign of a mature social enterprise is the establishing of a social Center of Excellence (CoE), which serves as a hub for high-level social strategy, training and education, research, measurement and accountability, and vendor selection. This CoE is led by a corporate Social Strategist, most likely from a Marketing or Corporate Communications background. Reporting to them are the Community Managers, the front lines of customer interaction and engagement; business unit liaisons that coordinate the enterprise; and social media campaign/product managers, social analysts, and developers. With content rising as the defining factor for social success, Altimeter also sees a Content Strategist position emerging. Across the enterprise, Altimeter has seen 5 organizational patterns. Watching the video will give you the pros and cons of each. Decentralized - Anyone can do anything at any time on any social channel. Centralized – One central groups controls all social communication for the company. Hub and Spoke – A centralized group, but business units can operate their own social under the hub’s guidance and execution. Most enterprises are using this model. Dandelion – Each business unit develops their own social strategy & staff, has its own ability to deploy, and its own ability to engage under the central policies of the CoE. Honeycomb – Every employee can do social, but as opposed to the decentralized model, it’s coordinated and monitored on one platform. The average enterprise has a whopping 178 social accounts, nearly ¼ of which are usually semi-idle and need to be scrapped. The last thing any C-suite needs is to cope with fragmented technologies, solutions and platforms. It’s neither scalable nor strategic. The prepared, effective social enterprise has a technology partner that can quickly and holistically integrate emerging platforms and technologies, such that whatever internal social command structure you’ve set up can continue efficiently executing strategy without skipping a beat. @mikestiles

    Read the article

  • How to Set Up Your Enterprise Social Organization?

    - by Richard Lefebvre
    By Mike Stiles on Dec 04, 2012 The rush for business organizations to establish, grow, and adopt social was driven out of necessity and inevitability. The result, however, was a sudden, booming social presence creating touch points with customers, partners and influencers, but without any corporate social organization or structure in place to effectively manage it. Even today, many business leaders remain uncertain as to how to corral this social media thing so that it makes sense for their enterprise. Imagine their panic when they hear one of the most beneficial approaches to corporate use of social involves giving up at least some hierarchical control and empowering employees to publicly engage customers. And beyond that, they should also be empowered, regardless of their corporate status, to engage and collaborate internally, spurring “off the grid” innovation. An HBR blog points out that traditionally, enterprise organizations function from the top down, and employees work end-to-end, structured around business processes. But the social enterprise opens up structures that up to now have not exactly been embraced by turf-protecting executives and managers. The blog asks, “What if leaders could create a future where customers, associates and suppliers are no longer seen as objects in the system but as valued sources of innovation, ideas and energy?” What if indeed? The social enterprise activates internal resources without the usual obsession with position. It is the dawn of mass collaboration. That does not, however, mean this mass collaboration has to lead to uncontrolled chaos. In an extended interview with Oracle, Altimeter Group analyst Jeremiah Owyang and Oracle SVP Reggie Bradford paint a complete picture of today’s social enterprise, including internal organizational structures Altimeter Group has seen emerge. One sign of a mature social enterprise is the establishing of a social Center of Excellence (CoE), which serves as a hub for high-level social strategy, training and education, research, measurement and accountability, and vendor selection. This CoE is led by a corporate Social Strategist, most likely from a Marketing or Corporate Communications background. Reporting to them are the Community Managers, the front lines of customer interaction and engagement; business unit liaisons that coordinate the enterprise; and social media campaign/product managers, social analysts, and developers. With content rising as the defining factor for social success, Altimeter also sees a Content Strategist position emerging. Across the enterprise, Altimeter has seen 5 organizational patterns. Watching the video will give you the pros and cons of each. Decentralized - Anyone can do anything at any time on any social channel. Centralized – One central groups controls all social communication for the company. Hub and Spoke – A centralized group, but business units can operate their own social under the hub’s guidance and execution. Most enterprises are using this model. Dandelion – Each business unit develops their own social strategy & staff, has its own ability to deploy, and its own ability to engage under the central policies of the CoE. Honeycomb – Every employee can do social, but as opposed to the decentralized model, it’s coordinated and monitored on one platform. The average enterprise has a whopping 178 social accounts, nearly ¼ of which are usually semi-idle and need to be scrapped. The last thing any C-suite needs is to cope with fragmented technologies, solutions and platforms. It’s neither scalable nor strategic. The prepared, effective social enterprise has a technology partner that can quickly and holistically integrate emerging platforms and technologies, such that whatever internal social command structure you’ve set up can continue efficiently executing strategy without skipping a beat. @mikestiles

    Read the article

  • Why Executives Need Enterprise Project Portfolio Management: 3 Key Considerations to Drive Value Across the Organization

    - by Melissa Centurio Lopes
    Normal 0 false false false EN-US 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:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Cambria","serif";} By: Guy Barlow, Oracle Primavera Industry Strategy Director Over the last few years there has been a tremendous shift – some would say tectonic in nature – that has brought project management to the forefront of executive attention. Many factors have been driving this growing awareness, most notably, the global financial crisis, heightened regulatory environments and a need to more effectively operationalize corporate strategy. Executives in India are no exception. In fact, given the phenomenal rate of progress of the country, top of mind for all executives (whether in finance, operations, IT, etc.) is the need to build capacity, ramp-up production and ensure that the right resources are in place to capture growth opportunities. This applies across all industries from asset-intensive – like oil & gas, utilities and mining – to traditional manufacturing and the public sector, including services-based sectors such as the financial, telecom and life sciences segments are also part of the mix. However, compounding matters is a complex, interplay between projects – big and small, complex and simple – as companies expand and grow both domestically and internationally. So, having a standardized, enterprise wide solution for project portfolio management is natural. Failing to do so is akin to having two ERP systems, one to manage “large” invoices and one to manage “small” invoices. It makes no sense and provides no enterprise wide visibility. Therefore, it is imperative for executives to understand the full range of their business commitments, the benefit to the company, current performance and associated course corrections if needed. Irrespective of industry and regardless of the use case (e.g., building a power plant, launching a new financial service or developing a new automobile) company leaders need to approach the value of enterprise project portfolio management via 3 critical areas: Normal 0 false false false EN-US 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:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Cambria","serif";} 1. Greater Financial Discipline – Improve financial rigor and results through better governance and control is an imperative given today’s financial uncertainty and greater investment scrutiny. For example, as India plans a US$1 trillion investment in the country’s infrastructure how do companies ensure costs are managed? How do you control cash flow? Can you easily report this to stakeholders? 2. Improved Operational Excellence – Increase efficiency and reduce costs through robust collaboration and integration. Upwards of 66% of cost variances are driven by poor supplier collaboration. As you execute initiatives do you have visibility into the performance of your supply base? How are they integrated into the broader program plan? 3. Enhanced Risk Mitigation – Manage and react to uncertainty through improved transparency and contingency planning. What happens if you’re faced with a skills shortage? How do you plan and account for geo-political or weather related events? In summary, projects are not just the delivery of a product or service to a customer inside a predetermined schedule; they often form a contractual and even moral obligation to shareholders and stakeholders alike. Hence the intimate connection between executives and projects, with the latter providing executives with the platform to demonstrate that their organization has the capabilities and competencies needed to meet and, whenever possible, exceed their customer commitments. Effectively developing and operationalizing corporate strategy is the hallmark of successful executives and enterprise project and portfolio management allows them to achieve this goal. Article was first published for Manage India, an e-newsletter, PMI India.

    Read the article

  • Eclipse organization: workspaces, working sets, projects, folders, multiple source folders, ....!!!

    - by Ricket
    There is quite a tier of organization in Eclipse. You can have multiple workspaces, each of which can have projects, these projects can be assigned to working sets, and then each project can have source folders... How do you use all this organization? Do you even use it all? Working sets are so hidden that I hardly know what they are; are they commonly used, or are they hidden because they are so uncommonly used? What is even the methodology behind all this? I'd like a good explanation of the recommended way to use all these different organizational layers, because at the moment I basically just have a bunch of random projects in a single workspace (the default %USER%/workspace folder) and it's getting to be quite an alphabetical mess. So in essence: How do you keep your Eclipse workspace(s) organized?

    Read the article

  • Code Organization Connundrum: Web Project With Multiple Supporting DLLs?

    - by Code Sherpa
    Hi. I am trying to get a handle on the best practice for code organization within my project. I have looked around on the internet for good examples and, so far, I have seen examples of a web project with one or multiple supporting class libraries that it references or a web project with sub-folders that follow its namespace conventions. Assuming there is no right answer, this is what I currently have for code organization: MyProjectWeb This is my web site. I am referencing my class libraries here. MyProject.DLL As the base namespace, I am using this DLL for files that need to be generally consumable. For example, my class "Enums" that has all the enumerations in my project lives there. As does class MyProjectException for all exception handling. MyProject.IO.DLL This is a grouping of maybe 20 files that handle file upload and download (so far). MyProject.Utilities.DLL ALl my common classes and methods bunched up together in one generally consumable DLL. Each class follows a "XHelper" convention such as "SqlHelper, AuthHelper, SerializationHelper, and so on... MyProject.Web.DLL I am using this DLL as the main client interface. Right now, the majority of class files here are: 1) properties (such as School, Location, Account, Posts) 2) authorization stuff ( such as custom membership, custom role, & custom profile providers) My question is simply - does this seem logical? Also, how do I avoid having to cross reference DLLs from one project library to the next? For example, MyProject.Web.DLL uses code from MyProject.Utilities.DLL and MyProject.Utilities.DLL uses code from MyProject.DLL. Is this solved by clicking on properties and selecting "Dependencies"? I tried that but still don't seem to be accessing the namespaces of the assembly I have selected. Do I have to reference every assembly I need for each class library? Responses appreciated and thanks for your patience.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Subquery or Join – Various Options – SQL Server Engine knows the Best

    - by pinaldave
    This is followup post of my earlier article SQL SERVER – Convert IN to EXISTS – Performance Talk, after reading all the comments I have received I felt that I could write more on the same subject to clear few things out. First let us run following four queries, all of them are giving exactly same resultset. USE AdventureWorks GO -- use of = SELECT * FROM HumanResources.Employee E WHERE E.EmployeeID = ( SELECT EA.EmployeeID FROM HumanResources.EmployeeAddress EA WHERE EA.EmployeeID = E.EmployeeID) GO -- use of in SELECT * FROM HumanResources.Employee E WHERE E.EmployeeID IN ( SELECT EA.EmployeeID FROM HumanResources.EmployeeAddress EA WHERE EA.EmployeeID = E.EmployeeID) GO -- use of exists SELECT * FROM HumanResources.Employee E WHERE EXISTS ( SELECT EA.EmployeeID FROM HumanResources.EmployeeAddress EA WHERE EA.EmployeeID = E.EmployeeID) GO -- Use of Join SELECT * FROM HumanResources.Employee E INNER JOIN HumanResources.EmployeeAddress EA ON E.EmployeeID = EA.EmployeeID GO Let us compare the execution plan of the queries listed above. Click on image to see larger image. It is quite clear from the execution plan that in case of IN, EXISTS and JOIN SQL Server Engines is smart enough to figure out what is the best optimal plan of Merge Join for the same query and execute the same. However, in the case of use of Equal (=) Operator, SQL Server is forced to use Nested Loop and test each result of the inner query and compare to outer query, leading to cut the performance. Please note that here I no mean suggesting that Nested Loop is bad or Merge Join is better. This can very well vary on your machine and amount of resources available on your computer. When I see Equal (=) operator used in query like above, I usually recommend to see if user can use IN or EXISTS or JOIN. As I said, this can very much vary on different system. What is your take in above query? I believe SQL Server Engines is usually pretty smart to figure out what is ideal execution plan and use it. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Joins, SQL Optimization, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • SOA, Java EE and data organization

    - by jolasveinn
    At the company I work for, we're currently splitting up our monolith solution into a number of small services (SOA). Many of the services are small, so we'd like to deploy a number of these services on the same application server, JBoss 7.1 in this case. As per the SOA philosophy, the independence of each service and the teams working on them is very important. What would be the best way to organize the data? Use one schema per service Would you use one datasource per schema in the application server? Or use one datasource, prefixing all DB object names with the schema name in some transparent manner? Use a shared schema, but evading any naming collisions by requiring each service to use a distinct prefix for all DB objects Other options? Am I maybe thinking this completely wrong here? :)

    Read the article

  • Library Organization in .NET

    - by Greg Ros
    I've written a .NET bitwise operations library as part of my projects (stuff ranging from get MSB set to some more complicated bitwise transformations) and I mean to release it as free software. I'm a bit confused about a design aspect of the library, though. Many of the methods/transformations in the library come with different endianness. A simple example is a getBitAt method that regards index 0 as the least significant bit, or the most significant bit, depending on the version used. In practice, I've found that using separate functions for different endianness results in much more comprehensible and reusable code than assuming all operations are little-endian or something. I'm really stumped regarding how best to package the library. Should I have methods that have LE and BE versions take an enum parameter in their signature, e.g. Endianness.Little, Endianness.Big? Should I have different static classes with identically named methods? such as MSB.GetBit and LSB.GetBit On a much wider note, is there a standard I could use in cases like this? Some guide? Is my design issue trivial? I have a perfectionist bent, and I sometimes get stuck on tricky design issues like this... Note: I've sort of realized I'm using endianness somewhat colloquially to refer to the order/place value of digital component parts (be they bits, bytes, or words) in a larger whole, in any setting. I'm not talking about machine-level endianness or serial transmission endianness. Just about place-value semantics in general. So there isn't a context of targeting different machines/transmission techniques or something.

    Read the article

  • Good practice or service for monitoring unhandled application errors for a small organization

    - by palto
    I'm working with multiple software with varying ways of monitoring for errors. When I make software, I usually send email with the stack trace to admins(usually me). Some customer software is monitored by a team who check that a particular batch run was successfull. Other software might not have any monitoring at all(someone will call when things go wrong horribly). Sending emails is good, except when things start going wrong, my mail gets filled fast. Also I don't want to solve the same problem in code for every software. Is there some relatively cheap and low maintenance software or practice to handle this. I want it to be cheap/low maintenance because usually I work alone or in teams of 5 or smaller. For example it would be great if errors would be aggregated so I don't get 10 000 emails when something unexpected happens... For clarification: By unhandled errors I mean Exceptions that were unhandled by application code that were propagated to Tomcat or Jboss. I don't need help with how to catch those errors. I need help with what to do with them. Is there any cloud application that I could send my errors to? Or some simple server to install? Or some library that can handle errors using configuration files. I use Java if that is any help.

    Read the article

  • Isn't class scope purely for organization?

    - by Di-0xide
    Isn't scope just a way to organize classes, preventing outside code from accessing certain things you don't want accessed? More specifically, is there any functional gain to having public, protected, or private-scoped methods? Is there any advantage to classifying method/property scope rather than to, say, just public-ize everything? My presumption says no simply because, in binary code, there is no sense of scope (other than r/w/e, which isn't really scope at all, but rather global permissions for a block of memory). Is this correct? What about in languages like Java and C#[.NET]?

    Read the article

  • Beyond Cloud Technology, Enabling A More Agile and Responsive Organization

    - by sxkumar
    This is the second part of the blog “Clouds, Clouds Everywhere But not a Drop of Rain”. In the first part,  I was sharing with you how a broad-based transformation makes cloud more than a technology initiative, I will describe in this section how it requires people (organizational) and process changes as well, and these changes are as critical as is the choice of right tools and technology. People: Most IT organizations have a fairly complex organizational structure. There are different groups, managing different pieces of the puzzle, and yet, they don't always work together. Provisioning a new application therefore may require a request to float endlessly through system administrators, DBAs and middleware admin worlds – resulting in long delays and constant finger pointing.  Cloud users expect end-to-end automation - which requires these silos to be greatly simplified, if not completely eliminated.  Most customers I talk to acknowledge this problem but are quick to admit that such a transformation is hard. As hard as it may be, I am afraid that the status quo is no longer an option. Sticking to an organizational structure that was created ages back will not only impede cloud adoption,  it also risks making the IT skills increasingly irrelevant in a world that is rapidly moving towards converged applications and infrastructure.   Process: Most IT organizations today operate with a mindset that they must fully "control" access to any and all types of IT services. This in turn leads to people clinging on to outdated manual approval processes .  While requiring approvals for scarce resources makes sense, insisting that every single request must be manually approved defeats the very purpose of cloud. Not only this causes delays, thereby at least partially negating the agility benefits, it also results in gross inefficiency. In a cloud environment, self-service access should be governed by policies, quotas that the administrators can define upfront . For a cloud initiative to be successful, IT organizations MUST be ready to empower users by giving them real control rather than insisting on brokering every single interaction between users and the cloud resources. Technology: From a technology perspective, cloud is about consolidation, standardization and automation. A consolidated and standardized infrastructure helps increase utilization and reduces cost. Additionally, it  enables a much higher degree of automation - thereby providing users the required agility while minimizing operational costs.  Obviously, automation is the key to cloud. Unfortunately it hasn’t received as much attention within enterprises as it should have.  Many organizations are just now waking up to the criticality of automation and it still often gets relegated to back burner in favor of other "high priority" projects. However, it is important to understand that without the right type and level of automation, cloud will remain a distant dream for most enterprises. This in turn makes the choice of the cloud management software extremely critical.  For a cloud management software to be effective in an enterprise environment, it must meet the following qualifications: Broad and Deep Solution It should offer a broad and deep solution to enable the kind of broad-based transformation we are talking about.  Its footprint must cover physical and virtual systems, as well as infrastructure, database and application tiers. Too many enterprises choose to equate cloud with virtualization. While virtualization is a critical component of a cloud solution, it is just a component and not the whole solution. Similarly, too many people tend to equate cloud with Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS). While it is perfectly reasonable to treat IaaS as a starting point, it is important to realize that it is just the first stepping stone - and on its own it can only provide limited business benefits. It is actually the higher level services, such as (application) platform and business applications, that will bring about a more meaningful transformation to your enterprise. Run and Manage Efficiently Your Mission Critical Applications It should not only be able to run your mission critical applications, it should do so better than before.  For enterprises, applications and data are the critical business assets  As such, if you are building a cloud platform that cannot run your ERP application, it isn't truly a "enterprise cloud".  Also, be wary of  vendors who try to sell you the idea that your applications must be written in a certain way to be able to run on the cloud. That is nothing but a bogus, self-serving argument. For the cloud to be meaningful to enterprises, it should adopt to your applications - and not the other way around.  Automated, Integrated Set of Cloud Management Capabilities At the root of many of the problems plaguing enterprise IT today is complexity. A complex maze of tools and technology, coupled with archaic  processes, results in an environment which is inflexible, inefficient and simply too hard to manage. Management tool consolidation, therefore, is key to the success of your cloud as tool proliferation adds to complexity, encourages compartmentalization and defeats the very purpose that you are building the cloud for. Decision makers ought to be extra cautious about vendors trying to sell them a "suite" of disparate and loosely integrated products as a cloud solution.  An effective enterprise cloud management solution needs to provide a tightly integrated set of capabilities for all aspects of cloud lifecycle management. A simple question to ask: will your environment be more or less complex after you implement your cloud? More often than not, the answer will surprise you.  At Oracle, we have understood these challenges and have been working hard to create cloud solutions that are relevant and meaningful for enterprises.  And we have been doing it for much longer than you may think. Oracle was one of the very first enterprise software companies to make our products available on the Amazon Cloud. As far back as in 2007, we created new cloud solutions such as Cloud Database Backup that are helping customers like Amazon save millions every year.  Our cloud solution portfolio is also the broadest and most deep in the industry  - covering public, private, hybrid, Infrastructure, platform and applications clouds. It is no coincidence therefore that the Oracle Cloud today offers the most comprehensive set of public cloud services in the industry.  And to a large part, this has been made possible thanks to our years on investment in creating cloud enabling technologies. I will dedicated the third and final part of the blog “Clouds, Clouds Everywhere But not a Drop of Rain” to Oracle Cloud Technologies Building Blocks and how they mapped into our vision of Enterprise Cloud. Stay Tuned.

    Read the article

  • design a large scale network for an organization

    - by Essam
    hello.i am so new to networking i want to design a large scale network for an organization with HQ and two branches. i want to use class A address for that.my questions are: if i am using the network address 30.0.0.0 for the whole organization how can it be different from another organization company or whatever which is using the same address in another country? now i have the three locations for this organization,so i need 5 subnets [one for the HQ,two for branch A and branch B , one for connecting A to HQ and one for connecting branch B with HQ since i will use central DHCP server at the HQ,is that(number of subnetting) right? is it advisable to use class A or class B for this organization it term of address that will be wasted (lets say it is a university with two branches in two different states)?! that is all your help is highly appropriated.

    Read the article

  • Unable to add CRM 2011's Organization service as Service Reference to VS project

    - by Scorpion
    I have problem accessing Organization Service when I try to add it as a Service Reference in Visual Studio. However, I can Access the Service in browser. I have tried to add OrganizationData service and there is no issue with that. An Error occurred while attempting to find service at 'http://xxxxxxxx/xxxxx/XRMServices/2011/Organization.svc'. Error Details There was an error downloading 'http://xxxxxxxx/xxxxx/XRMServices/2011/Organization.svc/_vti_bin/ListData.svc/$metadata'. The request failed with HTTP status 400: Bad Request. Metadata contains a reference that cannot be resolved: 'http://xxxxxxxx/xxxxx/XRMServices/2011/Organization.svc'. Metadata contains a reference that cannot be resolved: 'http://xxxxxxxx/xxxxx/XRMServices/2011/Organization.svc'. If the service is defined in the current solution, try building the solution and adding the service reference again.

    Read the article

  • How to adopt scrum agile methodology for a small .Net team

    - by Thabo
    I am working on a small product based company developing .Net applications. There is a small team with 5-6 developers. I am a person responsible for planning everything. But my primary role is Software developer. Now our current project is very unstable because of poor organization. Today my boss called me and told to submit a report about required resources, appropriate methodology, required man power and their salary scales to make the current project success. I know I don’t have enough organization skills and I need to go deep in my programming skills. So I need to focus only in the development. So I can’t manage the project anymore. Now I am searching some other ways to make ongoing development success. My questions are What is the suitable agile methodology to my team? Is Scrum is suitable for above mentioned scenario? If we adopt Scrum, what we have to do next? (I think hiring new one to manage the project is more suitable. So we have to get Scrum master and some other developers.) Are there any resources (books, Blogs and etc) to get some tips and advices to solve this problem? If Scrum is not a suitable methodology for our scenario, what else can be more suitable methodology to adopt? Can anyone give a good solution for my problem?

    Read the article

  • Validate cyclic organization unit

    - by abmv
    I have a object Organization Unit and I have a self reference to it in the same object public class OrganizationUnit: IOrganizationUnit { private string fName; public string Name { get { return fName; } set { SetPropertyValue("Name", ref fName, (string) value); } } private OrganizationUnit fManagedBy; public IOrganizationUnit ManagedBy { get { return fManagedBy; } set { SetPropertyValue("ManagedBy", ref fManagedBy, (OrganizationUnit)value); } } } I need a method that will throw an exception if it finds a child organization unit in the third level is referencing a parent Organization unit, or to say cyclic parent organization. A is main B managed by A C

    Read the article

  • ea: import requirements from csv file

    - by bolekprez
    During import requirements from csv file I have a message: Bad object type when creating new record of type '' File I was trying to import: GUID$Name$Notes$Scope {BF467CF6-FF97-4dd4-894C-3F09E713678C}$NameOfReq$description$Public {71B26F9A-5418-499e-B635-F2DB158D3FF1}$Requirement1$$Public {0}$Requir1$blah$Public First 2 (+header) lines becomes from existing requirements and there is no problem with import. Last line should create a new object of requirement in enterprise architect, but there is a message mentioned above. Any solution? How should proper file to create (import from csv file) a new requirements look like?

    Read the article

  • Should I implement BackBone.js into my ASP.NET WebForms applications?

    - by Walter Stabosz
    Background I'm trying to improve my group's current web app development pattern. Our current pattern is something we came up with while trying to rich web apps on top of ASP.NET WebForms (none of us knew ASP.NET MVC). This is the current pattern: ! Our application is using the WinForms Framework. Our ASPX pages are essentially just HTML, we use almost no WebControls. We use JavaScript/jQuery to perform all of our UI events and AJAX calls. For a single ASPX page, we have a single .js file. All of our AJAX calls are POSTs (not RESTful at all) Our AJAX calls contact WebMethods which we have defined in a series of ASMX files. One ASMX file per business object. Why Change? I want to revise our pattern a bit for a couple of reasons: We're starting to find that our JavaScript files are getting a bit unwieldy. We're using a hodgepodge of methods for keeping our local data and DOM updates in sync. We seem to spend too much time writing code to keep things in sync, and it can get tricky to debug. I've been reading Developing Backbone.js Applications and I like a lot of what Backbone has to offer in terms of code organization and separation of concerns. However, I've gotten to the chapter on RESTful app, I started to feel some hesitation about using Backbone. The Problem The problem is our WebMethods do not really fit into the RESTful pattern, which seems to be the way Backbone wants to consume them. For now, I'd only like to address our issue of disorganized client side code. I'd like to avoid major rewrites to our WebMethods. My Questions Is it possible to use Backbone (or a similar library) to clean up our client code, while not majorly impacting our data access WebMethods? Or would trying to use Backbone in this manner be a bastardization of it's intended use? Anyone have any suggestions for improving our pattern in the area of code organization and spending less time writing DOM and data sync code?

    Read the article

  • What are the standard directory layouts for source code?

    - by splattered bits
    I'm in the process of proposing a new standard directory layout that will be used across all the projects in our organization. Projects can have compiled source code, setup scripts, build scripts, third-party libraries, database scripts, resources, web services, web sites, etc. This is partly inspired by discovering Maven's standard layout. Are there any other standard layouts that are generally accepted in the industry?

    Read the article

  • DIY Grid-It Clone Organizes Your Tech Gear in Style

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    If you’re looking for a customizable way to organize your cables and small electronics, this DIY Grid-It clone uses a series of elastic straps to hold everything in place. Grid-It is a commercial cable and device organizer that is, essentially, a stiff insert for your briefcase or bag that is wrapped in inter-woven elastic straps. You lift and slide the straps the secure your items in place creating, on the fly, customized organization for your cables and small devices. This DIY project recreations the Grid-It system using an old hard cover book as the foundation for the straps–it doubles the amount of usable space, provides a stiff cover, and (if you select a striking book) looks striking at the same time. Hit up the link below to check out the full DIY guide. DIY Project: Vintage Book Travel-Tech Organizer [Design Sponge via GeekSugar] HTG Explains: When Do You Need to Update Your Drivers? How to Make the Kindle Fire Silk Browser *Actually* Fast! Amazon’s New Kindle Fire Tablet: the How-To Geek Review

    Read the article

  • Photo organization software

    - by Aaron
    I am looking for photo organization software for family albums that meets the following requirements: Online Gallery Synchronized Searchable Access Controls Local Copies Synchronized Searchable Multiple individuals Multiple people have local copies All can contribute to tagging It syncs additions/changes/tags to the online gallery, which in turn syncs to other local copies Powerful Tagging Entity based (support multiple people with the same name) Multiple Types of Tags (People, Pets, Things) Coordinate or Full Image Tag can focus on certain area in picture, or reference the full picture Facial Recognition Does anyone know of a piece of software like this? I will pay!!!

    Read the article

  • On Her Majesty's Secret Source Code: .NET Reflector 7 Early Access Builds Now Available

    - by Bart Read
    Dodgy Bond references aside, I'm extremely happy to be able to tell you that we've just released our first .NET Reflector 7 Early Access build. We're going to make these available over the coming weeks via the main .NET Reflector download page at: http://reflector.red-gate.com/Download.aspx Please have a play and tell us what you think in the forum we've set up. Also, please let us know if you run into any problems in the same place. The new version so far comes with numerous decompilation improvements including (after 5 years!) support for iterator blocks - i.e., the yield statement first seen in .NET 2.0. We've also done a lot of work to solidify the support for .NET 4.0. Clive's written about the work he's done to support iterator blocks in much more detail here, along with the odd problem he's encountered when dealing with compiler generated code: http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/clivet/96199.aspx. On the UI front we've started what will ultimately be a rewrite of the entire front-end, albeit broken into stages over two or three major releases. The most obvious addition at the moment is tabbed browsing, which you can see in Figure 1. Figure 1. .NET Reflector's new tabbed decompilation feature. Use CTRL+Click on any item in the assembly browser tree, or any link in the source code view, to open it in a new tab. This isn't by any means finished. I'll be tying up loose ends for the next few weeks, with a major focus on performance and resource usage. .NET Reflector has historically been a largely single-threaded application which has been fine up until now but, as you might expect, the addition of browser-style tabbing has pushed this approach somewhat beyond its limit. You can see this if you refresh the assemblies list by hitting F5. This shows up another problem: we really need to make Reflector remember everything you had open before you refreshed the list, rather than just the last item you viewed - I discovered that it's always done the latter, but it used to hide all panes apart from the treeview after a Refresh, including the decompiler/disassembler window. Ultimately I've got plans to add the whole VS/Chrome/Firefox style ability to drag a tab into the middle of nowhere to spawn a new window, but I need to be mindful of the add-ins, amongst other things, so it's possible that might slip to a 7.5 or 8.0 release. You'll also notice that .NET Reflector 7 now needs .NET 3.5 or later to run. We made this jump because we wanted to offer ourselves a much better chance of adding some really cool functionality to support newer technologies, such as Silverlight and Windows Phone 7. We've also taken the opportunity to start using WPF for UI development, which has frankly been a godsend. The learning curve is practically vertical but, I kid you not, it's just a far better world. Really. Stop using WinForms. Now. Why are you still using it? I had to go back and work on an old WinForms dialog for an hour or two yesterday and it really made me wince. The point is we'll be able to move the UI in some exciting new directions that will make Reflector easier to use whilst continuing to develop its functionality without (and this is key) cluttering the interface. The 3.5 language enhancements should also enable us to be much more productive over the longer term. I know most of you have .NET Fx 3.5 or 4.0 already but, if you do need to install a new version, I'd recommend you jump straight to 4.0 because, for one thing, it's faster, and if you're starting afresh there's really no reason not to. Despite the Fx version jump the Visual Studio add-in should still work fine in Visual Studio 2005, and obviously will continue to work in Visual Studio 2008 and 2010. If you do run into problems, again, please let us know here. As before, we continue to support every edition of Visual Studio exception the Express Editions. Speaking of Visual Studio, we've also been improving the add-in. You can now open and explore decompiled code for any referenced assembly in any project in your solution. Just right-click on the reference, then click Decompile and Explore on the context menu. Reflector will pop up a progress box whilst it decompiles your assembly (Figure 2) - you can move this out of the way whilst you carry on working. Figure 2. Decompilation progress. This isn't modal so you can just move it out of the way and carry on working. Once it's done you can explore your assembly in the Reflector treeview (Figure 3), also accessible via the .NET Reflector Explore Decompiled Assemblies main menu item. Double-click on any item to open decompiled source in the Visual Studio source code view. Use right-click and Go To Definition on the source view context menu to navigate through the code. Figure 3. Using the .NET Reflector treeview within Visual Studio. Double-click on any item to open decompiled source in the source code view. There are loads of other changes and fixes that have gone in, often under the hood, which I don't have room to talk about here, and plenty more to come over the next few weeks. I'll try to keep you abreast of new functionality and changes as they go in. There are a couple of smaller things worth mentioning now though. Firstly, we've reorganised the menus and toolbar in Reflector itself to more closely mirror what you might be used to in other applications. Secondly, we've tried to make some of the functionality more discoverable. For example, you can now switch decompilation target framework version directly from the toolbar - and the default is now .NET 4.0. I think that about covers it for the moment. As I said, please use the new version, and send us your feedback. Here's that download URL again: http://reflector.red-gate.com/Download.aspx. Until next time! Technorati Tags: .net reflector,7,early access,new version,decompilation,tabbing,visual studio,software development,.net,c#,vb

    Read the article

  • Oi! What's going on with the .NET Reflector update mechanism?

    - by Bart Read
    Anyone who's been using .NET Reflector for any length of time will by now be used to its built-in update mechanism. Every 6 months or so it will ask you to upgrade to the latest version and, if you don't, will refuse to work after a few weeks have passed. Love it or hate it, it mostly works pretty well, unless your internet connection is down, in which case it can be a pain in the ass (we're discussing options to improve this situation at the moment because, if you haven't fired it up for a while,...(read more)

    Read the article

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