Wanker authors writing wanker books
-
I aint a programmer but if I was I would be really pissed with these dickheads writing books named "Learn (insert programming language here) in 24 hours" Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours however why aren't real programmers hammering these bloody idiots and stop them from making a craft they have learnt and perfected after years and years sound like its a day job to learn!!!! Its crap and each of these authors should be told to pull their heads in and write something decent or dont write it at all! While I appreciate an expert sharing knowledge, it seems that many of these so called "authors" cant make money from thier programming so resort to writing crappy books and releasing them as ebooks because only the two bit publishers will accept them!
-
I aint a programmer but if I was I would be really pissed with these dickheads writing books named "Learn (insert programming language here) in 24 hours" Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours however why aren't real programmers hammering these bloody idiots and stop them from making a craft they have learnt and perfected after years and years sound like its a day job to learn!!!! Its crap and each of these authors should be told to pull their heads in and write something decent or dont write it at all! While I appreciate an expert sharing knowledge, it seems that many of these so called "authors" cant make money from thier programming so resort to writing crappy books and releasing them as ebooks because only the two bit publishers will accept them!
Those books barely teach you the basics of whatever it is they're writing about in "24" examples that take "1 hour" each. However, for the most part, I agree and think these books are a waste of space and I surely would never buy them or read them.
-
I aint a programmer but if I was I would be really pissed with these dickheads writing books named "Learn (insert programming language here) in 24 hours" Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours however why aren't real programmers hammering these bloody idiots and stop them from making a craft they have learnt and perfected after years and years sound like its a day job to learn!!!! Its crap and each of these authors should be told to pull their heads in and write something decent or dont write it at all! While I appreciate an expert sharing knowledge, it seems that many of these so called "authors" cant make money from thier programming so resort to writing crappy books and releasing them as ebooks because only the two bit publishers will accept them!
I'll entertain this for a moment, although it reeks of trolling.
idyot wrote:
I aint a programmer but
Then what are you doing here? The books aren't really crap. Some are, but not all. That would be somebanall sombunall[^]. That applies to all books regardless of whether they are part of the Dummy series or the 24 hour series. I used one awhile back when I needed to pick up a new language and it worked fine. It was a Java in 24 hours. And you know what? It worked. In 24 hours I was writing Java code. Now let's look at that in a little more detail. You mention our glorious craft as if you understand it yet you claim you're not a programmer. Most of these 24 hour books are geared towards tech people that already know the craft. The craft as you so eloquently put it is developing software. Irregardless of the language used. Its still either sequential, iterative, or conditional regardless of the syntax used. So if I know one syntax, but need to learn another, then these 24 hour books are pretty handy. They are not for beginners except to introduce them to the language. Not the art and craft of engineering software. But getting some basic syntax to compile. Nice attempt at a rant Idyot. I understand your login now. And would definately take you for a Kyle. You should get more creative on your next attempt, as this one was quite hollow. -- modified at 17:52 Friday 1st June, 2007 corrected the spelling for sombunall. Leaving irregardless, irregardless of whether you accept it as standard vs nonstandard. I know, double negative an all, but I like the word for that very reason. Kinda like I ain't doin' nuttin'.
This statement was never false.
-
I aint a programmer but if I was I would be really pissed with these dickheads writing books named "Learn (insert programming language here) in 24 hours" Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours however why aren't real programmers hammering these bloody idiots and stop them from making a craft they have learnt and perfected after years and years sound like its a day job to learn!!!! Its crap and each of these authors should be told to pull their heads in and write something decent or dont write it at all! While I appreciate an expert sharing knowledge, it seems that many of these so called "authors" cant make money from thier programming so resort to writing crappy books and releasing them as ebooks because only the two bit publishers will accept them!
idyot wrote:
I aint a programmer
Apparently.
idyot wrote:
Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours however why aren't real programmers hammering these bloody idiots and stop them from making a craft they have learnt and perfected after years and years sound like its a day job to learn!!!!
Well, my first ever C++ book was a '24 hours' book, and I knew fully that it was a beginner book, broken into 24 hour long lessons ( well, they took me an average of 20 minutes, but I understood the concept ). I found that book gave me an excellent beginning in c++, I moved on to more complex book and was working as a C++ developer 6 months after buying it.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
I'll entertain this for a moment, although it reeks of trolling.
idyot wrote:
I aint a programmer but
Then what are you doing here? The books aren't really crap. Some are, but not all. That would be somebanall sombunall[^]. That applies to all books regardless of whether they are part of the Dummy series or the 24 hour series. I used one awhile back when I needed to pick up a new language and it worked fine. It was a Java in 24 hours. And you know what? It worked. In 24 hours I was writing Java code. Now let's look at that in a little more detail. You mention our glorious craft as if you understand it yet you claim you're not a programmer. Most of these 24 hour books are geared towards tech people that already know the craft. The craft as you so eloquently put it is developing software. Irregardless of the language used. Its still either sequential, iterative, or conditional regardless of the syntax used. So if I know one syntax, but need to learn another, then these 24 hour books are pretty handy. They are not for beginners except to introduce them to the language. Not the art and craft of engineering software. But getting some basic syntax to compile. Nice attempt at a rant Idyot. I understand your login now. And would definately take you for a Kyle. You should get more creative on your next attempt, as this one was quite hollow. -- modified at 17:52 Friday 1st June, 2007 corrected the spelling for sombunall. Leaving irregardless, irregardless of whether you accept it as standard vs nonstandard. I know, double negative an all, but I like the word for that very reason. Kinda like I ain't doin' nuttin'.
This statement was never false.
Chris-Kaiser wrote:
Irregardless
ouch!
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
I aint a programmer but if I was I would be really pissed with these dickheads writing books named "Learn (insert programming language here) in 24 hours" Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours however why aren't real programmers hammering these bloody idiots and stop them from making a craft they have learnt and perfected after years and years sound like its a day job to learn!!!! Its crap and each of these authors should be told to pull their heads in and write something decent or dont write it at all! While I appreciate an expert sharing knowledge, it seems that many of these so called "authors" cant make money from thier programming so resort to writing crappy books and releasing them as ebooks because only the two bit publishers will accept them!
idyot wrote:
Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours
Naw. The stupid people are the ones that expect everyone else to take as long as they do to learn the simple stuff... :rolleyes:
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
-
Chris-Kaiser wrote:
Irregardless
ouch!
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Was wondering who was gonna catch that. I like Wikipedia's entry[^] irregardless of whether you demand that its still nonstandard. :laugh:
This statement was never false.
-
I'll entertain this for a moment, although it reeks of trolling.
idyot wrote:
I aint a programmer but
Then what are you doing here? The books aren't really crap. Some are, but not all. That would be somebanall sombunall[^]. That applies to all books regardless of whether they are part of the Dummy series or the 24 hour series. I used one awhile back when I needed to pick up a new language and it worked fine. It was a Java in 24 hours. And you know what? It worked. In 24 hours I was writing Java code. Now let's look at that in a little more detail. You mention our glorious craft as if you understand it yet you claim you're not a programmer. Most of these 24 hour books are geared towards tech people that already know the craft. The craft as you so eloquently put it is developing software. Irregardless of the language used. Its still either sequential, iterative, or conditional regardless of the syntax used. So if I know one syntax, but need to learn another, then these 24 hour books are pretty handy. They are not for beginners except to introduce them to the language. Not the art and craft of engineering software. But getting some basic syntax to compile. Nice attempt at a rant Idyot. I understand your login now. And would definately take you for a Kyle. You should get more creative on your next attempt, as this one was quite hollow. -- modified at 17:52 Friday 1st June, 2007 corrected the spelling for sombunall. Leaving irregardless, irregardless of whether you accept it as standard vs nonstandard. I know, double negative an all, but I like the word for that very reason. Kinda like I ain't doin' nuttin'.
This statement was never false.
Chris-Kaiser wrote:
I'll entertain this for a moment, although it reeks of trolling.
How?
Chris-Kaiser wrote:
Then what are you doing here?
To learn to program from real programmers
Chris-Kaiser wrote:
That applies to all books regardless of whether they are part of the Dummy series or the 24 hour series. I used one awhile back when I needed to pick up a new language and it worked fine. It was a Java in 24 hours. And you know what? It worked. In 24 hours I was writing Java code.
I hope that the limited time it took you to take this language up and therefore the lack of depth with which you can attack an application using Java is reflected in the price you charge you clients for your crappy and inefficient code
Chris-Kaiser wrote:
Nice attempt at a rant Idyot. I understand your login now. And would definately take you for a Kyle. You should get more creative on your next attempt, as this one was quite hollow.
Just my two cents, I figured it was ONLY real programmers who would agree anyway. Its the wannabes who would get upset with my comments and it is clear which group you belong too
Chris-Kaiser wrote:
corrected the spelling for sombunall. Leaving irregardless, irregardless of whether you accept it as standard vs nonstandard. I know, double negative an all, but I like the word for that very reason. Kinda like I ain't doin' nuttin'.This statement was never false.
Hehe, well arent you a freaking genius!
-
idyot wrote:
I aint a programmer
Apparently.
idyot wrote:
Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours however why aren't real programmers hammering these bloody idiots and stop them from making a craft they have learnt and perfected after years and years sound like its a day job to learn!!!!
Well, my first ever C++ book was a '24 hours' book, and I knew fully that it was a beginner book, broken into 24 hour long lessons ( well, they took me an average of 20 minutes, but I understood the concept ). I found that book gave me an excellent beginning in c++, I moved on to more complex book and was working as a C++ developer 6 months after buying it.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
Apparently.
Wow, your ARE a schizo, in another are of the board you take a different view of things. Ill just accept that this mindless comment is just the Canadian part of you coming out.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, my first ever C++ book was a '24 hours' book, and I knew fully that it was a beginner book, broken into 24 hour long lessons ( well, they took me an average of 20 minutes, but I understood the concept ). I found that book gave me an excellent beginning in c++, I moved on to more complex book and was working as a C++ developer 6 months after buying it.
Given your previous experience I don't doubt it is possible however the "Who should read this book" in the specific book I was referring to clearly states that newbies were who it was aimed at
-
idyot wrote:
Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours
Naw. The stupid people are the ones that expect everyone else to take as long as they do to learn the simple stuff... :rolleyes:
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
Clearly this programming is easier than I first thought so therefore I wonder why programmers belive they are worth so much. If it is so easy to learn then surely this should be reflected in the price.
-
I'll entertain this for a moment, although it reeks of trolling.
idyot wrote:
I aint a programmer but
Then what are you doing here? The books aren't really crap. Some are, but not all. That would be somebanall sombunall[^]. That applies to all books regardless of whether they are part of the Dummy series or the 24 hour series. I used one awhile back when I needed to pick up a new language and it worked fine. It was a Java in 24 hours. And you know what? It worked. In 24 hours I was writing Java code. Now let's look at that in a little more detail. You mention our glorious craft as if you understand it yet you claim you're not a programmer. Most of these 24 hour books are geared towards tech people that already know the craft. The craft as you so eloquently put it is developing software. Irregardless of the language used. Its still either sequential, iterative, or conditional regardless of the syntax used. So if I know one syntax, but need to learn another, then these 24 hour books are pretty handy. They are not for beginners except to introduce them to the language. Not the art and craft of engineering software. But getting some basic syntax to compile. Nice attempt at a rant Idyot. I understand your login now. And would definately take you for a Kyle. You should get more creative on your next attempt, as this one was quite hollow. -- modified at 17:52 Friday 1st June, 2007 corrected the spelling for sombunall. Leaving irregardless, irregardless of whether you accept it as standard vs nonstandard. I know, double negative an all, but I like the word for that very reason. Kinda like I ain't doin' nuttin'.
This statement was never false.
??? :confused: If that wasn't an honest rant, I don't know what is....
-- This Episode Has Been Modified To Fit Your Primitive Screen
-
Clearly this programming is easier than I first thought so therefore I wonder why programmers belive they are worth so much. If it is so easy to learn then surely this should be reflected in the price.
idyot wrote:
Clearly this programming is easier than I first thought so therefore I wonder why programmers belive they are worth so much.
Since when does the pay for a task vary directly with the difficulty of said task...? It's all about being willing to do the work... and knowing how to look good while doing it.
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
-
Those books barely teach you the basics of whatever it is they're writing about in "24" examples that take "1 hour" each. However, for the most part, I agree and think these books are a waste of space and I surely would never buy them or read them.
Wow, there IS at least one real programmer here... I did buy one and it WAS a waste of space and so was the support from both publisher and author despite the "email me anytime with questions" claim in the blurb.... I would have thought the programming community should get these dickheads to at least change the title of the books. I very much doubt 24 hours is enough time to learn anything of value!
-
idyot wrote:
Clearly this programming is easier than I first thought so therefore I wonder why programmers belive they are worth so much.
Since when does the pay for a task vary directly with the difficulty of said task...? It's all about being willing to do the work... and knowing how to look good while doing it.
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
Well it is generally well known though clearly not on your planet, that the more complex the task is to learn, the less people can do it and therefore the value of the task is increased. These authors in their titles suggest that 24 hours is enough, even worse, in their blurbs they suggest anyone can do it. So all I am saying is that if its so easy then surely this should be reflected in the cost.
Shog9 wrote:
and knowing how to look good while doing it.
Hmm, Remind me never to hire you, I prefer depth of knowledge and skill rather than someone who looks like they know what they are doing to a client who has no real idea. My guess is you end up with an application that looks great but either doesn't work at all or explodes under stress I have to say, most of these replies are surprising to me. I'm a pilot and if someone went around saying they could teach someone to fly a plane properly in 24 hours I would be both surprised and scared at the prospect of being in the same hemisphere! I thought real programmers (of course not the wannabes) would agree
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Apparently.
Wow, your ARE a schizo, in another are of the board you take a different view of things. Ill just accept that this mindless comment is just the Canadian part of you coming out.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, my first ever C++ book was a '24 hours' book, and I knew fully that it was a beginner book, broken into 24 hour long lessons ( well, they took me an average of 20 minutes, but I understood the concept ). I found that book gave me an excellent beginning in c++, I moved on to more complex book and was working as a C++ developer 6 months after buying it.
Given your previous experience I don't doubt it is possible however the "Who should read this book" in the specific book I was referring to clearly states that newbies were who it was aimed at
-
idyot wrote:
just the Canadian part of you coming out.
:laugh: Pssssst! He's Australian.
"Part of the inhumanity of the computer is that, once it is competently programmed and working smoothly, it is completely honest." - Isaac Asimov
Yes I know but the Australian in him would never make such a comment and have a completely different response to the same statement in another area of the board. So since he spends half his life in Canada (hence the schizo) I figured that this was just that side coming out of him.
-
Well it is generally well known though clearly not on your planet, that the more complex the task is to learn, the less people can do it and therefore the value of the task is increased. These authors in their titles suggest that 24 hours is enough, even worse, in their blurbs they suggest anyone can do it. So all I am saying is that if its so easy then surely this should be reflected in the cost.
Shog9 wrote:
and knowing how to look good while doing it.
Hmm, Remind me never to hire you, I prefer depth of knowledge and skill rather than someone who looks like they know what they are doing to a client who has no real idea. My guess is you end up with an application that looks great but either doesn't work at all or explodes under stress I have to say, most of these replies are surprising to me. I'm a pilot and if someone went around saying they could teach someone to fly a plane properly in 24 hours I would be both surprised and scared at the prospect of being in the same hemisphere! I thought real programmers (of course not the wannabes) would agree
idyot wrote:
These authors in their titles suggest that 24 hours is enough, even worse, in their blurbs they suggest anyone can do it.
And? Given a pliers and a slim instruction booklet, just about anyone can learn to wire up a light switch... but a journeyman electrician can still make a pretty good wage. There's a big difference between learning enough to get by and becoming a professional.
idyot wrote:
My guess is you end up with an application that looks great but either doesn't work at all or explodes under stress
Naw. My apps look good and work well. I happen to think both aspects are important... ;)
idyot wrote:
I'm a pilot and if someone went around saying they could teach someone to fly a plane properly in 24 hours I would be both surprised and scared at the prospect of being in the same hemisphere!
If Jane Neophyte works through her * in 24 hrs book and then makes a few simple mistakes on the payroll app she's writing, no one dies. Money is lost, employees are pissed off, etc... but then, you do get what you pay for... :->
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
-
idyot wrote:
These authors in their titles suggest that 24 hours is enough, even worse, in their blurbs they suggest anyone can do it.
And? Given a pliers and a slim instruction booklet, just about anyone can learn to wire up a light switch... but a journeyman electrician can still make a pretty good wage. There's a big difference between learning enough to get by and becoming a professional.
idyot wrote:
My guess is you end up with an application that looks great but either doesn't work at all or explodes under stress
Naw. My apps look good and work well. I happen to think both aspects are important... ;)
idyot wrote:
I'm a pilot and if someone went around saying they could teach someone to fly a plane properly in 24 hours I would be both surprised and scared at the prospect of being in the same hemisphere!
If Jane Neophyte works through her * in 24 hrs book and then makes a few simple mistakes on the payroll app she's writing, no one dies. Money is lost, employees are pissed off, etc... but then, you do get what you pay for... :->
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
Shog9 wrote:
but then, you do get what you pay for...
depends...did she write the Payroll App for the pilots? or worse still for ATC? Yes my original point exactly
-
Shog9 wrote:
but then, you do get what you pay for...
depends...did she write the Payroll App for the pilots? or worse still for ATC? Yes my original point exactly
-
I aint a programmer but if I was I would be really pissed with these dickheads writing books named "Learn (insert programming language here) in 24 hours" Now of course you'd be even more stupid to buy one of these books expecting to learn this in 24 hours however why aren't real programmers hammering these bloody idiots and stop them from making a craft they have learnt and perfected after years and years sound like its a day job to learn!!!! Its crap and each of these authors should be told to pull their heads in and write something decent or dont write it at all! While I appreciate an expert sharing knowledge, it seems that many of these so called "authors" cant make money from thier programming so resort to writing crappy books and releasing them as ebooks because only the two bit publishers will accept them!
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/4981/newbiepoperc1.jpg
The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. - John Adams
