April 2004 - Posts
To coincide with the one-year anniversary of receiving my MCSD (which I owe 100% of the motivation for to J Michael Palermo and Interface Technical Training, who required I get it) and the departure I'm making in just a little while back into the consulting world, I have decided to change the tagline for this blog.
Here's the story:
I respect JMP. He's a cool guy, one whom I consider a spiritual leader in my life, and an all-around excellent friend. Last year, we embarked on the creation of a new design for the Interface web site (link above). At some point he tasked me with an element of development for the site that allowed me to use this nifty combination of System.Security.Principal.IPrincipal and a nice touch of the Decorator pattern. Of course, I went nuts on the project and overengineered the whole architecture to account "for just about anything we might ever need." I'm not sure if he's using this stuff, but it was pretty comical when, 30 minutes or so following the requiremental provision, I checked it into SourceSafe and sent him a note to let him know that it was done. A few moments later, JMP walked over, shook his head, and got his wits about himself (if you've not seen him do this in meetspace, it's a site to behold - he opens his mouth, closes his eyes, raises a finger in the way only an MCT can, and then stops for a moment to contemplate just how he wants to say what it is he has to say). Then, he comes out with something that forever inspired me and changed the focus of my developmental paradigm:
"You are the quintessential street developer. You get a task, and you just sit down and do it. And it works. Not only for the requirement you built it to solve, but basically, for every requirement that it might ever need to solve in that general department. I love that about you."
We then went on to discuss how his "way" is more polished, more managerial, more UML-saavy and businesslike. Which is good. We need people like that to rope us in from time to time. And how I, on the other hand, pull up my bootstraps, accept each requirement as a new challenge, and sit there, coding briskly and furvishly, until it's wrapped up and deployed. It was, to say the least, one of those defining moments in everyone's lives that forever changes your focus, alters your perception, and modifies your direction.
Kind of like today will be, when I - like Chris - will be tenuring my resignation from corporate America, to return to the world of consulting, developing, and coding.
Ah, where I need to be!
Rob, I'd have to say that I'm glad you've taken notice to these beefs we keep hearing about. I've kept my trap shut (shock, awe, surprise, and be-bafflement abound now) for some time about this, but it's terribly frustrating that since 99% of the enterprise clients out there who are using .NET are really using 1.1 “stuff,” it seems a smack in the face by Microsoft and Microsoft bloggers to completely 86 any discussion, technique, or interest in 1.1 technologies. Most companies won't even start using 2.0 its “really” released - much less Whidbey, which goodness knows when will come out. Usually, large companies are slow to adopt because of cost, problems in releases, and slowness to adopt/test/integrate newer stuff. Does this mean that Microsoft will abandon them in the sense that fewer and fewer articles will be published about the existing, widely-used technologies?
Sure, Whidbey must be cool - to be honest, I've not even taken a look at it yet! Why not, being an “early adopter,” and all? Simple - no need for my clients, no need for my business, and no benefit for me aside from pure academia. So maybe I'll miss the boat!??! I can live with that, because my work will get done, my clients will be happy, and I'll release applications that can actually help a business stay in business.
When I was teaching, this was a little different. When I had the time to play a lot more than work, this was different. And when I didn't need to buy the newest, largest, most powerful computer out there just to install and use the stuff, this was different. But currently, I've heard horror stories of installing, using, and debugging the new stuff. So I ask everyone - why would I want to risk blowing up my development environment (at work or home office, that is), and risk losing time (and thus money), and risk my clients' unhappiness and probably hold up their businesses for goodness knows how much time as a result of the fact that I 86'ed my environment by installing alpha/beta/release candidate technology...
when no one can use it in the first place!
Don't get me wrong - I'm all for new stuff. I'm all for learning. I'm all for toying around with the nifty new shiny toys. These are all awesome, needed exercises. But what's more important - using something that's so new no one else even has it and no client will allow you to utilize or making good - or great - with the existing technology?
I choose the latter. I choose to push the boundaries of what's already released, already in production and accepted in my client base's technological arsenal. I choose to use what's there for the betterment of my business and my clients, and to innovate with the tools I already have at my disposal.
Technology doesn't exist for technology's sake. It exists for a greater good - to be useful.
Thanks to Rob Howard
, who quoted me
in his recent article on the Provider Model! Awesome props!
i've been itching to write recently, and thanks to robert mclaws, who kind of inspired me yesterday, i've written some code and an article to go along with it on codeproject.com. the article outlines the usage and implementation of an exception management and reporting library
i just wrote. check it out!
quite cool, this link. upon reception of a cease and desist letter from apple, these guys have gone out and broken
the itunes' “you can only play this on X machines and Y ipods” limitation. and they did it using mono and c#.
Sure, I'm a remoting moron, I'm totally not afraid to admit it. With that out of the way, I have some a quick question for thos of you who aren't remoting morons. Is it possible to handle events raised in a server object by a client using client activation? Of course, this seems a wee bit impossible by theory, but nonetheless I have to ask the question. Anyone? Bueller?
I think the best part of this article, is the mention that the information in it was read from an email “intercepted” from Microsoft. Is this legal? On with the topic - what's the deal? Is this true? Has all of this been stripped out of Longhorn to get it out the door sooner?
. check this out with your speakers or headphones turned on.
i thought “i want a famous face” was bad enough when the teenager received lyposuction to remove unwanted pounds of skin from her body (after, of course, she shed over 150 pounds herself and had saggy... stuff). but this device, known as the rc gastron
, just doesn't seem to be a great idea. what's going on here? swallow a little balloon and make it swell up inside your stomach? what are they