Search Results

Search found 22625 results on 905 pages for 'must do better'.

Page 57/905 | < Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >

  • Spotlight on Claims: Serving Customers Under Extreme Conditions

    - by [email protected]
    Oracle Insurance's director of marketing for EMEA, John Sinclair, recently attended the CII Spotlight on Claims event in London. Bad weather and its implications for the insurance industry have become very topical as the frequency and diversity of natural disasters - including rains, wind and snow - has surged across Europe this winter. On England's wettest day on record, the county of Cumbria was flooded with 12 inches of rain within 24 hours. Freezing temperatures wreaked havoc on European travel, causing high speed TVG trains to break down and stranding hundreds of passengers under the English Chanel in a tunnel all night long without heat or electricity. A storm named Xynthia thrashed France and surrounding countries with hurricane force, flooding ports and killing 51 people. After the Spring Equinox, insurers may have thought the worst had past. Then came along Eyjafjallajökull, spewing out vast quantities of volcanic ash in what is turning out to be one of most costly natural disasters in history. Such extreme events challenge insurance companies' ability to service their customers just when customers need their help most. When you add economic downturn and competitive pressures to the mix, insurers are further stretched and required to continually learn and innovate to meet high customer expectations with reduced budgets. These and other issues were hot topics of discussion at the recent "Spotlight on Claims" seminar in London, focused on how weather is affecting claims and the insurance industry. The event was organized by the CII (Chartered Insurance Institute), a group with 90,000 members. CII has been at the forefront in setting professional standards for the insurance industry for over a century. Insurers came to the conference to hear how they could better serve their customers under extreme weather conditions, learn from the experience of their peers, and hear about technological breakthroughs in climate modeling, geographic intelligence and IT. Customer case studies at the conference highlighted the importance of effective and constant communication in handling the overflow of catastrophe related claims. First and foremost is the need to rapidly establish initial communication with claimants to build their confidence in a positive outcome. Ongoing communication then needs to be continued throughout the claims cycle to mange expectations and maintain ownership of the process from start to finish. Strong internal communication to support frontline staff was also deemed critical to successful crisis management, as was communication with the broader insurance ecosystem to tap into extended resources and business intelligence. Advances in technology - such web based systems to access policies and enter first notice of loss in the field - as well as customer-focused self-service portals and multichannel alerts, are instrumental in improving customer satisfaction and helping insurers to deal with the claims surge, which often can reach four or more times normal workloads. Dynamic models of the global climate system can now be used to better understand weather-related risks, and as these models mature it is hoped that they will soon become more accurate in predicting the timing of catastrophic events. Geographic intelligence is also being used within a claims environment to better assess loss reserves and detect fraud. Despite these advances in dealing with catastrophes and predicting their occurrence, there will never be a substitute for qualified front line staff to deal with customers. In light of pressures to streamline efficiency, there was debate as to whether outsourcing was the solution, or whether it was better to build on the people you have. In the final analysis, nearly everybody agreed that in the future insurance companies would have to work better and smarter to keep on top. An appeal was also made for greater collaboration amongst industry participants in dealing with the extreme conditions and systematic stress brought on by natural disasters. It was pointed out that the public oftentimes judged the industry as a whole rather than the individual carriers when it comes to freakish events, and that all would benefit at such times from the pooling of limited resources and professional skills rather than competing in silos for competitive advantage - especially the end customer. One case study that stood out was on how The Motorists Insurance Group was able to power through one of the most devastating catastrophes in recent years - Hurricane Ike. The keys to Motorists' success were superior people, processes and technology. They did a lot of upfront planning and invested in their people, creating a healthy team environment that delivered "max service" even when they were experiencing the same level of devastation as the rest of the population. Processes were rapidly adapted to meet the challenge of the catastrophe and continually adapted to Ike's specific conditions as they evolved. Technology was fundamental to the execution of their strategy, enabling them anywhere access, on the fly reassigning of resources and rapid training to augment the work force. You can learn more about the Motorists experience by watching this video. John Sinclair is marketing director for Oracle Insurance in EMEA. He has more than 20 years of experience in insurance and financial services.

    Read the article

  • Merck Serono Gains Deep Understanding of Product Portfolio Value-Drivers, Risks, and Sales Expectations Through Forecasting Solution

    - 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-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} Merck Serono S.A. is the biopharmaceutical division of Merck KGaA. It offers leading brands in 150 countries to help patients with cancer, multiple sclerosis, infertility, endocrine and metabolic disorders, as well as cardiovascular diseases. Challenges: Establish a better decision-making framework for its complex, development portfolio of pharmaceutical products, where single-point estimates or expected averages of portfolio values, portfolio risks, and sales forecasts are insufficient and can be misleading Enable the company to be aware at all times of the range of possible outcomes of technical and market risks and uncertainties, such as the technical uncertainty of whether a product will produce the desired clinical outcomes, or the market-related uncertainty of whether a product will be outperformed by its competitors Solutions to Overcome the Challenges: Used Oracle Crystal Ball to devise a Monte-Carlo-based approach to better analyze and define the values and risks of the company’s development portfolio, laying the groundwork for optimized decision-making Enabled a better understanding of the range of potential values and risks to improve portfolio planning Enabled detailed analysis of the likelihood of favorable or unfavorable outcomes, such as the likelihood of whether Merck Serono can meet its sales targets planned for the next ten years with its existing product portfolio Gained the ability to take into account correlative risks, synergies and project interactions, enabling Merck Serono to better forecast what the company may achieve—for example, that there is a 70% probability of a particular sales target being met Established Monte-Carlo-based analysis using Oracle Crystal Ball as a useful element in decision-making at the board level, as the approach provides a better analysis of values and risks associated with the company’s product portfolio “Oracle Crystal Ball enables us to make Monte Carlo simulations of the potential value and sales of our development portfolio. It is a very powerful tool for gaining a thorough understanding and improved awareness of value drivers, uncertainties, and risks, along with associated probabilities.” – Riccardo Lampariello, Associate Director, Merck Serono S.A Why Oracle “We chose Oracle Crystal Ball to enable us to perform Monte Carlo analysis, which gives us a deeper understanding and improved awareness of the value drivers, uncertainties and risks of our portfolio of development projects,” said Kimber Hardy, head of valuation and analysis, Merck Serono S.A. 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-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} Click here to read the full version of the customer success story 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-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

    Read the article

  • Windows for IoT, continued

    - by Valter Minute
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/WindowsEmbeddedCookbook/archive/2014/08/05/windows-for-iot-continued.aspxI received many interesting feedbacks on my previous blog post and I tried to find some time to do some additional tests. Bert Kleinschmidt pointed out that pins 2,3 and 10 of the Galileo are connected directly to the SOC, while pin 13, the one used for the sample sketch is controlled via an I2C I/O expander. I changed my code to use pin 2 instead of 13 (just changing the variable assignment at the beginning of the code) and latency was greatly reduced. Now each pulse lasts for 1.44ms, 44% more than the expected time, but ways better that the result we got using pin 13. I also used SetThreadPriority to increase the priority of the thread that was running the sketch to THREAD_PRIORITY_HIGHEST but that didn't change the results. When I was using the I2C-controlled pin I tried the same and the timings got ways worse (increasing more than 10 times) and so I did not commented on that part, wanting to investigate the issua a bit more in detail. It seems that increasing the priority of the application thread impacts negatively the I2C communication. I tried to use also the Linux-based implementation (using a different Galileo board since the one provided by MS seems to use a different firmware) and the results of running the sample blink sketch modified to use pin 2 and blink the led for 1ms are similar to those we got on the same board running Windows. Here the difference between expected time and measured time is worse, getting around 3.2ms instead of 1 (320% compared to 150% using Windows but far from the 100.1% we got with the 8-bit Arduino). Both systems were not under load during the test, maybe loading some applications that use part of the CPU time would make those timings even less reliable, but I think that those numbers are enough to draw some conclusions. It may not be worth running a full OS if what you need is Arduino compatibility. The Arduino UNO is probably the best Arduino you can find to perform this kind of development. The Galileo running the Linux-based stack or running Windows for IoT is targeted to be a platform for "Internet of Things" devices, whatever that means. At the moment I don't see the "I" part of IoT. We have low level interfaces (SPI, I2C, the GPIO pins) that can be used to connect sensors but the support for connectivity is limited and the amount of work required to deliver some data to the cloud (using a secure HTTP request or a message queuing system like APMQS or MQTT) is still big and the rich OS underneath seems to not provide any help doing that.Why should I use sockets and can't access all the high level connectivity features we have on "full" Windows?I know that it's possible to use some third party libraries, try to build them using the Windows For IoT SDK etc. but this means re-inventing the wheel every time and can also lead to some IP concerns if used for products meant to be closed-source. I hope that MS and Intel (and others) will focus less on the "coolness" of running (some) Arduino sketches and more on providing a better platform to people that really want to design devices that leverage internet connectivity and the cloud processing power to deliver better products and services. Providing a reliable set of connectivity services would be a great start. Providing support for .NET would be even better, leaving native code available for hardware access etc. I know that those components may require additional storage and memory etc. So making the OS componentizable (or, at least, provide a way to install additional components) would be a great way to let developers pick the parts of the system they need to develop their solution, knowing that they will integrate well together. I can understand that the Arduino and Raspberry Pi* success may have attracted the attention of marketing departments worldwide and almost any new development board those days is promoted as "XXX response to Arduino" or "YYYY alternative to Raspberry Pi", but this is misleading and prevents companies from focusing on how to deliver good products and how to integrate "IoT" features with their existing offer to provide, at the end, a better product or service to their customers. Marketing is important, but can't decide the key features of a product (the OS) that is going to be used to develop full products for end customers integrating it with hardware and application software. I really like the "hackable" nature of open-source devices and like to see that companies are getting more and more open in releasing information, providing "hackable" devices and supporting developers with documentation, good samples etc. On the other side being able to run a sketch designed for an 8 bit microcontroller on a full-featured application processor may sound cool and an easy upgrade path for people that just experimented with sensors etc. on Arduino but it's not, in my humble opinion, the main path to follow for people who want to deliver real products.   *Shameless self-promotion: if you are looking for a good book in Italian about the Raspberry Pi , try mine: http://www.amazon.it/Raspberry-Pi-alluso-Digital-LifeStyle-ebook/dp/B00GYY3OKO

    Read the article

  • Mac OS X Server 10.6 - Apple's software mirrored RAID worth it?

    - by Arko
    Hi, I am installing an Intel Xserve (Quad core Xeon) with Snow Leopard Server (10.6) on two 80Gb 7200rpm SATA HDs. I created a mirrored RAID set using Disk Utility with those two drives, all went fine. I was then asking myself if this is really a good idea. I know that an hardware RAID system would be better, but what about this software RAID? Have you any feedback on this? Will it work fine if one HD breaks down? Does this affect performance? [UPDATE] In short: Hardware RAID is better than software RAID which is better than none. Thank you all for the answers, they were very helpful. Especially Gordon's script to monitor failures. As Apple's software RAID is pretty silent about a drive failure.

    Read the article

  • Loose Coupling in Object Oriented Design

    - by m3th0dman
    I am trying to learn GRASP and I found this explained (here on page 3) about Low Coupling and I was very surprised when I found this: Consider the method addTrack for an Album class, two possible methods are: addTrack( Track t ) and addTrack( int no, String title, double duration ) Which method reduces coupling? The second one does, since the class using the Album class does not have to know a Track class. In general, parameters to methods should use base types (int, char ...) and classes from the java.* packages. I tend to diasgree with this; I believe addTrack(Track t) is better than addTrack(int no, String title, double duration) due to various reasons: It is always better for a method to as fewer parameters as possible (according to Uncle Bob's Clean Code none or one preferably, 2 in some cases and 3 in special cases; more than 3 needs refactoring - these are of course recommendations not holly rules). If addTrack is a method of an interface, and the requirements need that a Track should have more information (say year or genre) then the interface needs to be changed and so that the method should supports another parameter. Encapsulation is broke; if addTrack is in an interface, then it should not know the internals of the Track. It is actually more coupled in the second way, with many parameters. Suppose the no parameter needs to be changed from int to long because there are more than MAX_INT tracks (or for whatever reason); then both the Track and the method need to be changed while if the method would be addTrack(Track track) only the Track would be changed. All the 4 arguments are actually connected with each other, and some of them are consequences from others. Which approach is better?

    Read the article

  • Should we enforce code style in our large codebase?

    - by eighttrackmind
    By "code style" I mean 2 things: Style, eg. // bad if(foo){ ... } // good if (foo) { ... } Conventions and idiomaticity, where two ways of writing the same thing are functionally equivalent, but one is more idiomatic. eg. // bad if (fooLib.equals(a, b)) { ... } // good if (a == b) { ... } I think it makes sense to use an auto-formatter to enforce #1 automatically. So my question is specifically about #2. I like to break things down into pros and cons, here's what I've come up with so far: Pros: Used by many large codebases (eg. Google, jQuery) Helps make it a bit easier to work on new areas of the codebase Helps make code more portable (this is not necessarily true) Code style is automatic once you get used to it Makes it easier to fast-decline pull requests Cons: Takes engineers’ and code reviewers’ time away from more important things (like developing features) Code should ideally be rewritten every 2-3 years anyway, so it’s more important to focus on getting the architecture right, and achieving high test coverage Adds strain to code reviews (eg. “don’t do it this way, I like this other way better”) Even if I’ve been using a code style for a while, I still sometime have to pause and think about how to write a line better Having an enforced, uniform code style makes it hard to experiment with potentially better styles Maintaining a style guide takes a lot of incremental effort Engineers rarely read through the style guide. More often, it's cited in code reviews And as a secondary question: we also have many smaller repositories - should the same code style be enforced there?

    Read the article

  • Single/Mulitple LUN for vmware vm hosting

    - by Yucong Sun
    I'm building a iscsi storage system for hosting about ~500 Vmware vm running concurrently. And I have a disk array with 15 disks, I only need moderate write performance but preferably not SPOFed. so, that leaves me with RAID1 / RAID10 , I have couple choices: 1) 3x LUN 4disk RAID10 + 3 hot-swap 2) 1x LUN 14disk RAID10 + 1 hot-swap 3) 7x LUN 2disk RAID1 + 1 host-swap Which way is better? Is there a real problem running 500 vms on single LUN? and would it be better to resort to 7 LUns so each VM is better isolated with each other?

    Read the article

  • NetApp and SQL Server?

    - by Edinor
    Do you have any good or bad experiences to share running SQL Server OLTP Systems on NetApp appliances? I have been working with a small, relatively low-volume cluster with a lower-end NetApp device, and I have found the environment to be generally unstable, at least compared to my experiences with other SANs, iSCSI arrays, and DAS setups. I struggle to believe that RAID DP and WAFL are more than fairy-dust technologies. A solution has been proposed to me that I just need a bigger, better NetApp, with PAM cards and other cool technology I've not heard of, and I feel like I would be better off spending a quarter of that on good direct-attached drives and a beefy server. At the same time, I feel that an Enterprise-class SAN should be something I can count on to be consistently a more stable, better performer than the less expensive solution I might propose. Are you a SQL Server DBA in an OLTP environment and love your NetApp? If you don't like them, why not?

    Read the article

  • Craftsmanship is ALL that Matters

    - by Wayne Molina
    Today, I'm going to talk about a touchy subject: the notion of working in a company that doesn't use the prescribed "best practices" in its software development endeavours.  Over the years I have, using a variety of pseudonyms, asked this question on popular programming forums.  Although I always add in some minor variation of the story to avoid suspicion that it's the same person posting, the crux of the tale remains the same: A Programmer’s Tale A junior software developer has just started a new job at an average company, creating average line-of-business applications for internal use (the most typical scenario programmers find themselves in).  This hypothetical newbie has spent a lot of time reading up on the "theory" of software development, devouring books, blogs and screencasts from well-known and respected software developers in the community in order to broaden his knowledge and "do what the pros do".  He begins his new job, eager to apply what he's learned on a real-world project only to discover that his new teammates doesn't use any of those concepts and techniques.  They hack their way through development, or in a best-case scenario use some homebrew, thrown-together semblance of a framework for their applications that follows not one of the best practices suggested by the “elite” in the software community - things like TDD (TDD as a "best practice" is the only subjective part of this post, but it's included here due to a very large following of respected developers who consider it one), the SOLID principles, well-known and venerable tools, even version control in a worst case and truly nightmarish scenario.  Our protagonist is frustrated that he isn't doing things the "proper" way - a way he's spent personal time digesting and learning about and, more importantly, a way that some of the top developers in the industry advocate - and turns to a forum to ask the advice of his peers. Invariably the answer I, in the guise of the concerned newbie, will receive is that A) I don't know anything and should just shut my mouth and sling code the bad way like everybody else on the team, and B) These "best practices" are fade or a joke, and the only thing that matters is shipping software to your customers. I am here today to say that anyone who says this, or anything like it, is not only full of crap but indicative of exactly the type of “developer” that has helped to give our industry a bad name.  Here is why: One Who Knows Nothing, Understands Nothing On one hand, you have the cognoscenti of the .NET development world.  Guys like James Avery, Jeremy Miller, Ayende Rahien and Rob Conery; all well-respected and noted programmers that are pretty much our version of celebrities.  These guys write blogs, books, and post videos outlining the "correct" way of writing software to make sure it not only works but is maintainable and extensible and a joy to work with.  They tout the virtues of the SOLID principles, or of using TDD/BDD, or using a mature ORM like NHibernate, Subsonic or even Entity Framework. On the other hand, you have Joe Everyman, Lead Software Developer at Initrode Corporation - in our hypothetical story Joe is the junior developer's new boss.  Joe's been with Initrode for 10 years, starting as the company’s very first programmer and over the years building up a little fiefdom of his own until at the present he’s in charge of all Initrode’s software development.  Joe writes code the same way he always has, without bothering to learn much, if anything.  He looked at NHibernate once and found it was "too hard", so he uses a primitive implementation of the TableDataGateway pattern as a wrapper around SqlClient.SqlConnection and SqlClient.SqlCommand instead of an actual ORM (or, in a better case scenario, has created his own ORM); the thought of using LINQ or Entity Framework or really anything other than his own hastily homebrew solution has never occurred to him.  He doesn't understand TDD and considers “testing” to be using the .NET debugger to step through code, or simply loading up an app and entering some values to see if it works.  He doesn't really understand SOLID, and he doesn't care to.  He's worked as a programmer for years, and that's all that counts.  Right?  WRONG. Who would you rather trust?  Someone with years of experience and who writes books, creates well-known software and is akin to a celebrity, or someone with no credibility outside their own minute environment who throws around their clout and company seniority as the "proof" of their ability?  Joe Everyman may have years of experience at Initrode as a programmer, and says to do things "his way" but someone like Jeremy Miller or Ayende Rahien have years of experience at companies just like Initrode, THEY know ten times more than Joe Everyman knows or could ever hope to know, and THEY say to do things "this way". Here's another way of thinking about it: If you wanted to get into politics and needed advice on the best way to do it, would you rather listen to the mayor of Hicktown, USA or Barack Obama?  One is a small-time nobody while the other is very well-known and, as such, would probably have much more accurate and beneficial advice. NOTE: The selection of Barack Obama as an example in no way, shape, or form suggests a political affiliation or political bent to this post or blog, and no political innuendo should be mistakenly read from it; the intent was merely to compare a small-time persona with a well-known persona in a non-software field.  Feel free to replace the name "Barack Obama" with any well-known Congressman, Senator or US President of your choice. DIY Considered Harmful I will say right now that the homebrew development environment is the WORST one for an aspiring programmer, because it relies on nothing outside it's own little box - no useful skill outside of the small pond.  If you are forced to use some half-baked, homebrew ORM created by your Director of Software, you are not learning anything valuable you can take with you in the future; now, if you plan to stay at Initrode for 10 years like Joe Everyman, this is fine and dandy.  However if, like most of us, you want to advance your career outside a very narrow space you will do more harm than good by sticking it out in an environment where you, to be frank, know better than everybody else because you are aware of alternative and, in almost most cases, better tools for the job.  A junior developer who understands why the SOLID principles are good to follow, or why TDD is beneficial, or who knows that it's better to use NHibernate/Subsonic/EF/LINQ/well-known ORM versus some in-house one knows better than a senior developer with 20 years experience who doesn't understand any of that, plain and simple.  Anyone who disagrees is either a liar, or someone who, just like Joe Everyman, Lead Developer, relies on seniority and tenure rather than adapting their knowledge as things evolve. In many cases, the Joe Everymans of the world act this way out of fear - they cannot possibly fathom that a “junior” could know more than them; after all, they’ve spent 10 or more years in the same company, doing the same job, cranking out the same shoddy software.  And here comes a newbie who hasn’t spent 10+ years doing the same things, with a fresh and often radical take on the craft, and Joe Everyman is afraid he might have to put some real effort into his career again instead of just pointing to his 10 years of service at Initrode as “proof” that he’s good, or that he might have to learn something new to improve; in most cases the problem is Joe Everyman, and by extension Initrode itself, has a mentality of just being “good enough”, and mediocrity is the rule of the day. A Thorn Bush is No Place for a Phoenix My advice is that if you work on a team where they don't use the best practices that some of the most famous developers in our field say is the "right" way to do things (and have legions of people who agree), and YOU are aware of these practices and can see why they work, then LEAVE the company.  Find a company where they DO care about quality, and craftsmanship, otherwise you will never be happy.  There is no point in "dumbing" yourself down to the level of your co-workers and slinging code without care to craftsmanship.  In 95% of these situations there will be no point in bringing it to the attention of Joe Everyman because he won't listen; he might even get upset that someone is trying to "upstage" him and fire the newbie, and replace someone with loads of untapped potential with a drone that will just nod affirmatively and grind out the tasks assigned without question. Find a company that has people smart enough to listen to the "best and brightest", and be happy.  Do not, I repeat, DO NOT waste away in a job working for ignorant people.  At the end of the day software development IS a craft, and a level of craftsmanship is REQUIRED for any serious professional.  When you have knowledgeable people with the credibility to back it up saying one thing, and small-time people who are, to put it bluntly, nobodies in the field saying and doing something totally different because they can't comprehend it, leave the nobodies to their own devices to fade into obscurity.  Work for a company that uses REAL software engineering techniques and really cares about craftsmanship.  The biggest issue affecting our career, and the reason software development has never been the respected, white-collar career it was meant to be, is because hacks and charlatans can pass themselves off as professional programmers without following a lick of good advice from programmers much better at the craft than they are.  These modern day snake-oil salesmen entrench themselves in companies by hoodwinking non-technical businesspeople and customers with their shoddy wares, end up in senior/lead/executive positions, and push their lack of knowledge on everybody unfortunate enough to work with/for/under them, crushing any dissent or voices of reason and change under their tyrannical heel and leaving behind a trail of dismayed and, often, unemployed junior developers who were made examples of to keep up the facade and avoid the shadow of doubt being cast upon them. To sum this up another way: If you surround yourself with learned people, you will learn.  Surround yourself with ignorant people who can't, as the saying goes, see the forest through the trees, and you'll learn nothing of any real value.  There is more to software development than just writing code, and the end goal should not be just "shipping software", it should be shipping software that is extensible, maintainable, and above all else software whose creation has broadened your knowledge in some capacity, even if a minor one.  An eager newbie who knows theory and thirsts for knowledge can easily be moulded and taught the advanced topics, but the same can't be said of someone who only cares about the finish line.  This industry needs more people espousing the benefits of software craftsmanship and proper software engineering techniques, and less Joe Everymans who are unwilling to adapt or foster new ways of thinking. Conclusion - I Cast “Protection from Fire” I am fairly certain this post will spark some controversy and might even invite the flames.  Please keep in mind these are opinions and nothing more.  A little healthy rant and subsequent flamewar can be good for the soul once in a while.  To paraphrase The Godfather: It helps to get rid of the bad blood.

    Read the article

  • What do you think are the biggest software development issues, in small to medium businesses?

    - by Ron-Damon
    Hi, I own a small software development company that developes Web software to other small and medium companies in Chile. The business process is very complex and it is hard to stablish where to put the efforts to make our company better, more efficient, and give better solutions. I'm also a TI master's degree student and i'm making a paper about this subject, so any help would be great to help my company and my paper. I have considered 3 areas for the problems: 1) Software development problems 2) Web development problems 3) Small and Medium companies problems I don't know about you, but at least this "business formula" in Chile has not received very much support but it is getting better, but today my company is far from being self-sufficient. UPDATE: Thanks guys for your support so far, i'm updating because i have somewhat enough information so i decided to go deeper within the subjects, wish i would like you to consider for your next answers/commentaries on the subject: 1) Software development problems (3) 1.1 Incomplete problem picture 1.2 Useless delivered software 1.3 Unrealistic or inadequate schedule 2) Web development problems (3) 2.1 Apparently non-viable implementation 2.2 Unefficient module construction design 2.3 Reduced result system inter-operability 3) Small and Medium companies problems (3) 3.1 Very specific, but narrowed requerired system characteristics 3.2 Developed system is not used 3.3 Positivist demand for activities in project execution There are only 3 problems for category, to deliberately keep a thiner scope. Also, i have considered that it would have been apropiated to separate the third clasification on two, but won't be doing it just now: 3) Small and Medium software developement providers problems 4) Small and Medium software developement clients problems In that case, i think i would have made the scope of the problem wider and it is not what i want to do now, until at least i'm very trough with the other two clasifications. What you think?

    Read the article

  • Do you think that exposure to BASIC can mutilate your mind? [closed]

    - by bigown
    It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration -- Edsger W. Dijkstra I have deep respect to Dijkstra but I don't agree with everything he said/wrote. I disagree specially with this quote on linked paper wrote 35 years ago about the Dartmouth BASIC implementation. Many of my coworkers or friends programmers started with BASIC, questions below have answers that indicate many programmers had their first experience on programming at BASIC. AFAIK many good programmers started at BASIC programming. I'm not talking about Visual Basic or other "modern" dialects of BASIC running on machines full of resources. I'm talking about old times BASIC running on "toy" computer, that the programmer had to worry about saving small numbers that need not be calculated as a string to save a measly byte because the computer had only a few hundreds of them, or have to use computed goto for lack of a more powerful feature, and many other things which require the programmer to think much before doing something and forcing the programmer to be creative. If you had experience with old time BASIC on a machine with limited resources (have in mind that a simple micro-controller today has much more resources than a computer in 1975, do you think that BASIC help your mind to find better solutions, to think like an engineer or BASIC drag you to dark side of programming and mutilated you mentally? Is good to learn a programming language running on a computer full of resources where the novice programmer can do all wrong and the program runs without big problems? Or is it better to learn where the programmer can't go wrong? What can you say about the BASIC have helped you to be a better/worse programmer? Would you teach old BASIC running on a 2KB (virtual) machine to a coming programmer? Sure, only exposure to BASIC is bad. Maybe you share my opinion that modern BASIC doesn't help too much because modern BASIC, as long other programming languages, gives facilities which allow the programmer doesn't think deeper. Additional information: Why BASIC?

    Read the article

  • The Cloud is STILL too slow!

    - by harry.foxwell(at)oracle.com
    If you've been in the computing industry sufficiently long enough to remember dialup modems and other "ancient" technologies, you might be tempted to marvel at today's wonderfully powerful multicore PCs, ginormous disks, and blazingly fast networks.  Wow, you're in Internet Nirvana, right!  Well, no, not by a long shot.Considering the exponentially growing expectations of what the Web, that is, "the Cloud", is supposed to provide, today's Web/Cloud services are still way too slow.Already we are seeing cloud-enabled consumer devices that are stressing even the most advanced public network services.  Like the iPad and its competitors, ever more powerful smart-phones, and an imminent hoard of special purpose gadgets such as the proposed "cloud camera" (see http://gdgt.com/discuss/it-time-cloud-camera-found-out-cnr/ ).And at the same time that the number and type of cloud services are growing, user tolerance for even the slightest of download delays is rapidly decreasing.  Ten years ago Web developers followed the "8-Second Rule", (average time a typical Web user would tolerate for a page to download and render).  Not anymore; now it's less than 3 seconds, and only a bit longer for mobile devices (see http://www.technologyreview.com/files/54902/GoogleSpeed_charts.pdf).  How spoiled we've become!Google, among others, recognizes this problem and is working to encourage the development of a faster Web (see http://www.technologyreview.com/web/32338/). They, along with their competitors and ISPs, will have to encourage and support significantly better Web performance in order to provide the types of services envisioned for the Cloud.  How will they do this? Through the development of faster components, better use of caching technologies, and the really tough one - exploiting parallelism. Not that parallel technologies like multicore processors are hard to build...we already have them.  It's just that we're not that good yet at using them effectively.  And if we don't get better, users will abandon cloud-based services...in less than 3 seconds.

    Read the article

  • The lifecycle of "cool"

    - by Dori
    I've been thinking lately about how some programming projects/products become "cool," and in particular, how that trend can later reverse. Here are two examples that might better explain my context: Textmate Whenever someone asks about text editors on OS X, the answer on the SE sites is an automatic "Textmate!" But looked at objectively: Textmate 1.0 shipped October 2004 Textmate 1.5 shipped January 2006 Textmate 2 was announced February 2006 As of September 2010, the currently shipping version is 1.5.9 In all of 2010, there have been a total of three posts on the Textmate blog At what point (if ever) do Textmate fans start thinking about switching to another text editor? When it breaks after some future Apple update? When alpha geeks they respect start recommending something else? Or? jQuery Whenever a JavaScript-related question is asked on the SE sites, the knee-jerk response is "jQuery!" I've seen it happen even when the question itself only required a single line of JavaScript. Or when the question could be better answered by using CSS. Do the answerers understand they're suggesting a blowtorch to light a candle? That they're recommending adding 70K or so of code to do something trivial? Or is it a symptom of "When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail"—that is, jQuery is all they know how to do, so that's their recommendation? And do they understand that while they may know jQuery well, that doesn't necessarily mean that they know JavaScript? Is there a way to explain that learning JavaScript would make them better jQuery programmers? My bigger-picture questions: Is this niche focus primarily a trait of programmers? How do you get programmers to not immediately jump to recommending their personal favorites? What can motivate programmers to review their initial selection criteria and possibly modify their choice? Your thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Continual Professional Development - proving new skills to non-technical employers

    - by Tom
    Background I work in a non-IT based company, as a professional software developer, building a large scale internal database system. I am fortunate to have a fairly senior position within the company, and have been working here for around 4 years. Often I get asked by management "how do you learn new things?". To be honest, I don't know how to answer this. Over the last 6 months, I've really gotten my teeth into some new techniques and technologies to make my level of coding far better and hopefully improve the quality of the software. Even if it's just refreshing my skills on things I've learnt already. Like last week I dived into some complex XLinq and TPL code (.net). Nothing revolutionary, but I feel like I am a bit better than before. Question The question is, how do I prove this to my employer? It'd be nice to be able to put this on paper. Possibilities I could: Keep a journal of what I've learnt - keeping the technical bits in (nobody would understand or care, but it's better than them being omitted) ???? (I've run out of ideas already) Any ideas? Thanks, Tom

    Read the article

  • C#.NET (AForge) against Java (JavaCV, JMF) for video processing

    - by Leron
    I'm starting to get really confused looking deeper and deeper at video processing world and searching for optimal choices. This is the reason to post this and some other questions to try and navigate myself in the best possible way. I really like Java, working with Java, coding with Java, at the same time C# is not that different from Java and Visual Studio is maybe the best IDE I've been working with. So even though I really want to do my projects in Java so I can get better and better Java programmer at the same time I'm really attract to video processing and even though I'm still at the beginning of this journey I want to take the right path. So I'm really in doubt could Java be used in a production environment for serious video processing software. As the title says I already have been looking at maybe the two most used technologies for video processing in Java - JMF and JavaCV and I'm starting to think that even they are used and they provide some functionality, when it comes to real work and real project that's not the first thing that comes to once mind, I mean to someone that have a professional opinion about this. On the other hand I haven't got the time to investigate .NET (c# specificly) options but even AForge looks a lot more serious library then those provided for Java. So in general -either ways I'm gonna spend a lot of time learning some technology and trying to do something that make sense with it, but my plan is at the end the thing that I'll eventually come up to be my headline project. To represent my skills and eventually help me find a job in the field. So I really don't want to spend time learning something that will give me the programming result I want but at the same time is not something that is needed in the real world development. So what is your opinion, which language, technology is better for this specific issue. Which one worths more in terms that I specified above?

    Read the article

  • Reading source code to learn

    - by perl.j
    As you develop as a programmer, IMO, you begin to see different practices, different Algorithms, and "more than one way to do it". Seeing this code can be a great learning experience for you, even though you did not write the code. But is doing this only going to confuse you? For example, let's say you have a library in any language that was created by a colleague, and you have been using it for a while. You decide to look at the actual source code, regardless of how extensive it is, and get a better look at how this library is written. For the sake of example, the function you use most often from this library is the max function, which finds the largest of two numbers. But this function is a lot more complicated than it needs to be. The way it is written is confusing the heck out of you, and you don't know how this works. Will this make you a better programmer, because you realize how complicated it is for such a simple function, or will it make you a worse coder because you feel less confidant? So my question, in general, is does reading source code make you a better programmer and if so how? If not why do people still do it?.

    Read the article

  • Talking JavaOne with Rock Star Charles Nutter

    - by Janice J. Heiss
    JavaOne Rock Stars, conceived in 2005, are the top rated speakers from the JavaOne Conference. They are awarded by their peers who through conference surveys recognize them for their outstanding sessions and speaking ability. Over the years many of the world’s leading Java developers have been so recognized.We spoke with distinguished Rock Star, Charles Nutter. A JRuby Update from Charles NutterCharles Nutter of Red Hat is well known as a lead developer of JRuby, a Ruby implementation of Java that is tightly integrated with Java to allow for the embedding of the interpreter into any Java application with full two-way access between the Java and the Ruby code. Nutter is giving the following sessions at this year’s JavaOne: CON7257 – “JVM Bytecode for Dummies (and the Rest of Us Too)” CON7284 – “Implementing Ruby: The Long, Hard Road” CON7263 – “JVM JIT for Dummies” BOF6682 – “I’ve Got 99 Languages, but Java Ain’t One” CON6575 – “Polyglot for Dummies” (Both with Thomas Enebo) I asked Nutter, to give us the latest on JRuby. “JRuby seems to have hit a tipping point this past year,” he explained, “moving from ‘just another Ruby implementation’ to ‘the best Ruby implementation for X,’ where X may be performance, scaling, big data, stability, reliability, security, and a number of other features important for today's applications. We're currently wrapping up JRuby 1.7, which improves support for Ruby 1.9 APIs, solves a number of user issues and concurrency challenges, and utilizes invokedynamic to outperform all other Ruby implementations by a wide margin. JRuby just gets better and better.” When asked what he thought about the rapid growth of alternative languages for the JVM, he replied, “I'm very intrigued by efforts to bring a high-performance JavaScript runtime to the JVM. There's really no reason the JVM couldn't be the fastest platform for running JavaScript with the right implementation, and I'm excited to see that happen.”And what is Nutter working on currently? “Aside from JRuby 1.7 wrap-up,” he explained, “I'm helping the Hotspot developers investigate invokedynamic performance issues and test-driving their new invokedynamic code in Java 8. I'm also starting to explore ways to improve the general state of dynamic languages on the JVM using JRuby as a guide, and to help the JVM become a better platform for all kinds of languages.”

    Read the article

  • Talking JavaOne with Rock Star Charles Nutter

    - by Janice J. Heiss
    JavaOne Rock Stars, conceived in 2005, are the top rated speakers from the JavaOne Conference. They are awarded by their peers who through conference surveys recognize them for their outstanding sessions and speaking ability. Over the years many of the world’s leading Java developers have been so recognized.We spoke with distinguished Rock Star, Charles Nutter. A JRuby Update from Charles NutterCharles Nutter of Red Hat is well known as a lead developer of JRuby, a Ruby implementation of Java that is tightly integrated with Java to allow for the embedding of the interpreter into any Java application with full two-way access between the Java and the Ruby code. Nutter is giving the following sessions at this year’s JavaOne: CON7257 – “JVM Bytecode for Dummies (and the Rest of Us Too)” CON7284 – “Implementing Ruby: The Long, Hard Road” CON7263 – “JVM JIT for Dummies” BOF6682 – “I’ve Got 99 Languages, but Java Ain’t One” CON6575 – “Polyglot for Dummies” (Both with Thomas Enebo) I asked Nutter, to give us the latest on JRuby. “JRuby seems to have hit a tipping point this past year,” he explained, “moving from ‘just another Ruby implementation’ to ‘the best Ruby implementation for X,’ where X may be performance, scaling, big data, stability, reliability, security, and a number of other features important for today's applications. We're currently wrapping up JRuby 1.7, which improves support for Ruby 1.9 APIs, solves a number of user issues and concurrency challenges, and utilizes invokedynamic to outperform all other Ruby implementations by a wide margin. JRuby just gets better and better.” When asked what he thought about the rapid growth of alternative languages for the JVM, he replied, “I'm very intrigued by efforts to bring a high-performance JavaScript runtime to the JVM. There's really no reason the JVM couldn't be the fastest platform for running JavaScript with the right implementation, and I'm excited to see that happen.”And what is Nutter working on currently? “Aside from JRuby 1.7 wrap-up,” he explained, “I'm helping the Hotspot developers investigate invokedynamic performance issues and test-driving their new invokedynamic code in Java 8. I'm also starting to explore ways to improve the general state of dynamic languages on the JVM using JRuby as a guide, and to help the JVM become a better platform for all kinds of languages.” Originally published on blogs.oracle.com/javaone.

    Read the article

  • How can I improve my error checking and handling?

    - by Google
    Lately I have been struggling to understand what the right amount of checking is and what the proper methods are. I have a few questions regarding this: What is the proper way to check for errors (bad input, bad states, etc)? Is it better to explicitly check for errors, or use functions like asserts which can be optimized out of your final code? I feel like explicitly checking clutters a program with a lot of extra code which shouldn't be executed in most situations anyway-- and not to mention most errors end up with an abort/exit failure. Why clutter a function with explicit checks just to abort? I have looked for asserts versus explicit checking of errors and found little to truly explain when to do either. Most say 'use asserts to check for logic errors and use explicit checks to check for other failures.' This doesn't seem to get us very far though. Would we say this is feasible: Malloc returning null, check explictly API user inserting odd input for functions, use asserts Would this make me any better at error checking? What else can I do? I really want to improve and write better, 'professional' code.

    Read the article

  • Project Codenames - Yea or Nay?

    - by rmx
    Where I work, most of our projects have (or at least attempt) descriptive, useful names. However we have a few with names that make no sense: I found that an assembly named WiFi which actually has nothing whatsoever to do with wi-fi, but is a codename. When I asked why, I was told that it's to protect company secrets incase some intern has few too many at the pub on Friday and starts chatting about the brand new 'WiFi' project he's been working on. Its clear that some people find enjoyment in finding silly / amusing codenames for their projects (like in this question). My question is: is it really a good idea to use codenames for your projects or are you better off spending the time to decide upon a descriptive name? My opinion is that in the long-run its better to give your projects relevant names. My reasoning is that if you can't think of a decent name, perhaps you don't really know the requirements well enough. I think there are better ways to 'protect company secrets' and I find it quite confusing when the name does not correlate at all with the content. It's just common sense, surely?! So do you use codenames and what the your reasons for or against this seemingly common, yet annoying (to me at least) practice?

    Read the article

  • Should I go with OpenGL to see my future in Game Development industry? [closed]

    - by Priyank
    Possible Duplicate: Should I continue studying OpenGL or just switch to DirectX to give me a better chance of landing a job in the game industry? I tried Google but found quite old articles, so I am in search of an answer in context to year 2012. Hi all, I don't know if you will consider this question appropriate for this community but I am constantly searching for a perfect answer. What I have seen is that most of the games that are released these days are DirectX 1x based. Except for few games like Starcraft or Diablo which don't have high end graphics are using OpenGL. So I have few questions to ask. The platforms i would like to target are PC (windows), Xbox 360 and PS3 (must). Should I go with learning OpenGL to see my future in game development industry? Or should I shift to Directx? If I learn OpenGL first, will it be difficult to learn direcx then? Which API is most suitable for indie development? Which one of the two API's are better from coder's (programmer's) point of view? Like OOP and style of coding. Is openGL being cross platform should be the only reason to choose it over Directx? Even when vendors are not providing enough stable drivers for it. Thanks in advance. I have read this post, but I have few questions. Should I continue studying OpenGL or just switch to DirectX to give me a better chance of landing a job in the game industry?

    Read the article

  • Four Proven Advantages of Online Learning | Outside Cost, Accessibility or Flexibility

    - by Mohit Phogat
    Coursera believes that online courses complement and supplement traditional education (versus a common misconception online will “replace” traditional.) Our research shows that Coursera’s platform, when used concurrently with a traditional classroom setup, is ideal for “blended learning” (i.e., students watch lectures pre-class, then class-time focuses on interactive work and discussion.) Additionally, we agree with Brad Zomick of SkilledUp—an online learning aggregator—who acknowledges an online course “isn’t an alternative at all but rather a different path with its own rewards.” The advantages of Coursera and our apps for mobile were straightforward and conspicuous from the start: we’re free, open, and flexible to learners’ unique needs and style. Over the past two years, however, the evidence proves there are many more tangible benefits to open, online learning. In SkilledUp’s “The Advantages of Online Courses [Infographic]”–crafted from findings of leading educational research–four observations stand out from the overt characteristics: Speedier Learning - “Research shows that online students achieve same or better learning results in about half the time as those in traditional courses” More Active, Engaged & Motivated - Learners thrive “when working with coursework that is challenging but within their capacity to master.” Tangible Skill Building - with an “improved attitude toward learning” Better Teaching Quality - Courses are taught by experts, with various multimedia and cutting-edge technology, and “are usually better organized than traditional courses” This is only the beginning, Courserians! Everyday we hear your incredible stories on how open online courses enrich your lives and enhance your careers. Meanwhile we study the steady stream of scientific, big-data research proving their worth on a large-scale (such as UPenn’s latest research on the welcomed diversity in Coursera-hosted Wharton MBA courses.) Our motto “Learning without Limits” reminds us that open, online courses give tremendous opportunity to those that might not otherwise have access (or time, or money) to study at a high-caliber institution. Source: Coursera

    Read the article

  • How can I keep a file in Windows 7's cache?

    - by netvope
    Sometimes you know better than Windows what files will be re-used later. Suppose you have 8GB of memory, and you use the same 1GB file every hour in an I/O-bound application (which takes 1 second to finish if the file is cached, and 1 minute if not.) Now you process some other 16GB of data that are not going to be re-used. Naturally the frequently used 1GB file will be pushed out of the cache. It would be beneficial if one can tell Windows to keep that 1GB file in memory. (Better yet, it would be great if I can tell Windows not to cache those 16GB of data, but I'm not optimistic that this can be done.) The poor-man's way to keep a file in the cache would be to keep reading the file. Are there any better ways? Are you aware of any programs that do this? (If this can be easily done under Linux, please let me know too.)

    Read the article

  • Happy New Year! Back to school :)

    - by Jim Wang
    A brand new year is upon us and it’s time to get cracking with WebMatrix again…and go back to school :).  Last year we ran a successful product walkthrough for WebMatrix Beta 2 with our students from around the world, gathering awesome feedback for the final version of WebMatrix which is coming soon!  I’d like to take this chance to thank all the students who participated in this effort…you have really helped make the final product much better than it would have been otherwise. In 2011, we’re looking, as always, at bigger and better things.  One of the ideas that has been floating around is the concept of a WebMatrix college course that you could take for actual credit.  Of course, this is going to require coordination with college educators, but we think we’re up to the challenge :) If your school is still using an antiquated language to teach their web development 101 course, and you’d like to switch to WebMatrix, we’d like to hear your voice – better yet if you have contacts from your school and would like to be one of the first to give the program a try!  Comment on this post or email wptsdrext at microsoft.com.  We look forward to partnering with you guys ^^.

    Read the article

  • Learning from jQuery - Solid fundament for experienced jQuery developers

    Frankly speaking, I had to sleep a night over before typing this review. And even now it is not an easy, straight-forward task to write this recension. I'm not sure whether I'm the right kind of audience this title is actually addressed to. It clearly states that this book is for web developers which are very familiar with jQuery library but would like to extend their knowledge to vanilla JavaScript. Not being part of this particular group it felt strange to go through the various chapters after all. This title is clearly addressed to experienced jQuery users and developers especially while looking for improvements in performance and better ways of optimisations. Sometimes just to simplify the existing jQuery code in order to avoid the heavy load of the complete jQuery library and sometimes for the better understanding of JavaScript and its syntax. Callum's style of writing is clear and the numerous code samples used to emphasize the various techniques are good ones and easy to understand. Quite interestingly, it put a light smile on my face when I compared his sample code of sending an AJAX request to some code in one of my own blog articles I wrote back in 2006 (in German language). JavaScript is clearly a mature language and certain requirements are simply done this way. And Callum explains the nuts and bolts of JavaScript very well. Personally, I gained most out of this book from chapter 5 - JavaScript Conventions. The paragraphs and code snippets on Optimizations and Common Antipatterns gave me a better understanding on various aspects of JavaScript development, and I definitely have to revise a couple of code fragments I have written in the past. Overall the book provides solid information on JavaScript for jQuery developers and is worth the money spent. Just be sure that you're part of the targeted audience.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >