Trying to learn and work with Microsoft products is like trying to herd cats
-
I agree. The first programming platform I ever owned was Borland C/C++ 3. It came with a stack of books. I think the concept of an 'MSDN" is great - IF it were supplemental reference material. But it is no replacement for a formal set of platform documentation. But all in all, I still think VS is the best thing going.
I agree completely. Others do and have been doing it right since long before there was a Microsoft. There just no excuse. MSDN is a wonderful construct containing 3rd rate or at least (intentionally???) incomplete information. VS.Net is an amazing IDE for amazing (though still somewhat half baked) software semi-documented in an unfortunately inscrutable manner. Sometimes I wonder if they're promoting personality cults by having certain highly visible Microsoft developers, e.g. Dino Esposito, come down off the mountain with the commandments that everyone has been thirsting for.
-
There is WAY to much information (and lack there of) in the Microsoft environment that is not available without going spelunking to Hell and back. I've got a library of 17 books just on ADO.Net, ASP.Net, C#, the Framework, DHTML & Javascript. (At about $50 pop (list anyway) and all are about to be obsoleted by .Net 2.) Most of them seem to completely ignore a lot of the more difficult and distasteful issues. IMHO, MSDN is hypertext Hell. They document the crap out of indivdual parameters but never explain how they are meant to be used together. And the circular references, Jeez! The Internet resources, like The Code Project, do a great job of sharing information and techniques but seldom point to any underlying documentation. The search for documentation combined with trial-and-error are HUGELY inefficient time-wise. So, why am I here? Trying to get some skills that'll keep me in pancakes and fuel oil. Damn, I miss IBM and Oracle documentation! Sorry, I just had to vent. ;P Will
I've programmed a few systems, and MSDN is a true joy. Should there ever be a "Madame Solveig" API, we would have "About Madame Solveig" (explainig concepts and terms), "Using Madame Solveig" (giving examples on common tasks) and "Madame Solveig Reference" (documenting parameters and error conditions fairly detailed). Yes, it's hyperlinked - If Madame Solveig were married to Microsoft Bob, each would have a link to the other. That's what hyperlinks are for! OldDog.Net wrote: I've got a library of 17 books just on ADO.Net, ASP.Net, C#, the Framework, DHTML & Javascript. Books today are often a pain, and it seems it's not always the authors fault.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
I've programmed a few systems, and MSDN is a true joy. Should there ever be a "Madame Solveig" API, we would have "About Madame Solveig" (explainig concepts and terms), "Using Madame Solveig" (giving examples on common tasks) and "Madame Solveig Reference" (documenting parameters and error conditions fairly detailed). Yes, it's hyperlinked - If Madame Solveig were married to Microsoft Bob, each would have a link to the other. That's what hyperlinks are for! OldDog.Net wrote: I've got a library of 17 books just on ADO.Net, ASP.Net, C#, the Framework, DHTML & Javascript. Books today are often a pain, and it seems it's not always the authors fault.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenHyperlinks are wonderful. Hyperlinking crap to other crap still gives you nothing more than hyperlinked crap. 100 million cross references is not a substitute for structure or content. Information is not readily available. It is dispersed over a large area. Detail, while abundant, is of little use in absense of context (as mentioned in another post, above). There IS a plethora of code snippets. How to accomplish a single instance of a particular task with one combination of components/parameters etc. And there are legions of professionals who accomplish their tasks by cobbling together these snippets with only a vague understanding of the code that they are using. Case in point, when I recently asked for help with a problem in which "inline expressions" were not resolving, a couple people offered bogus advice, one person suggested an alternative (thanks), and one person had the answer (thanks VERY much). I asked him where I could find this information that he had shared with me. No idea. I can't find any mention on MSDN or any of my sometimes helpful books. He knew but how? Someone else told him? Oral histories were a great way to pass the time sitting around the fire in the cave but for this? Or maybe he read it in another post or article. Who knows. Everybody who hits that problem is going to suffer through tacking down the resolution or give up and try to come up with a work-around. Is that RAD? Is that a productivity tool?
-
Hyperlinks are wonderful. Hyperlinking crap to other crap still gives you nothing more than hyperlinked crap. 100 million cross references is not a substitute for structure or content. Information is not readily available. It is dispersed over a large area. Detail, while abundant, is of little use in absense of context (as mentioned in another post, above). There IS a plethora of code snippets. How to accomplish a single instance of a particular task with one combination of components/parameters etc. And there are legions of professionals who accomplish their tasks by cobbling together these snippets with only a vague understanding of the code that they are using. Case in point, when I recently asked for help with a problem in which "inline expressions" were not resolving, a couple people offered bogus advice, one person suggested an alternative (thanks), and one person had the answer (thanks VERY much). I asked him where I could find this information that he had shared with me. No idea. I can't find any mention on MSDN or any of my sometimes helpful books. He knew but how? Someone else told him? Oral histories were a great way to pass the time sitting around the fire in the cave but for this? Or maybe he read it in another post or article. Who knows. Everybody who hits that problem is going to suffer through tacking down the resolution or give up and try to come up with a work-around. Is that RAD? Is that a productivity tool?
Maybe you are expectign to much from MSDN (and yes, CP is here to fill the gap :) ) Yes, there are coders cobbling together examples with only partial understanding (and they are often "sucessful"), yes there are many people who give "I tried this once, try it too" advise or simply spread misinformation. Thinking about my own use patterns, you are right in one aspect: MSDN requires quite some navigating. I've never considered that a problem with the offline version but this may be a style. I'v seen many strong and weak spots in MSDN, some stuff is prettxy much useless, and there's tons of space to improve, but in general I'm happy I can check most of the advise I get with MSDN (or similar docs). Compared to the size, the Quality of the docs is amazing. Point for your case: Find the user names that XP lists on the login screen is a pain, you have to dig through the entire Security API it seems. But I consider this time well spent, because I get a "feel" for it's architecture.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
Maybe you are expectign to much from MSDN (and yes, CP is here to fill the gap :) ) Yes, there are coders cobbling together examples with only partial understanding (and they are often "sucessful"), yes there are many people who give "I tried this once, try it too" advise or simply spread misinformation. Thinking about my own use patterns, you are right in one aspect: MSDN requires quite some navigating. I've never considered that a problem with the offline version but this may be a style. I'v seen many strong and weak spots in MSDN, some stuff is prettxy much useless, and there's tons of space to improve, but in general I'm happy I can check most of the advise I get with MSDN (or similar docs). Compared to the size, the Quality of the docs is amazing. Point for your case: Find the user names that XP lists on the login screen is a pain, you have to dig through the entire Security API it seems. But I consider this time well spent, because I get a "feel" for it's architecture.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenHey Peter, First, I am very thankful for anyone who takes the time to try and help me out with a problem. (That doesn't apply to the few folks who seem to have a need to post an answer to questions when they have nothing to offer besides a wise @ss remark.) I understand that there is a lot of hearsay knowledge out there and people haven't got the time to verify everything they say before offering it. I take each with a grain of salt and try them all hoping that one will be a solution. Not to beat this thing to death but my problem is not with MSDN itself, although I did refer to it as hyperlink Hell. Every other major software product that I've worked with had a comprehensive library that went with it. My complaint is with Microsoft for failing to put together the kind of comprehensive documentation that, after 24 years in DP (Data Processing) --> IS (Information Systems) --> MIS (Management Information Systems) --> and now IT, I have come to expect of any other major software vendor. I was initially spoiled by IBM which probaly does the best job of anyone. Likewise, Oracle and Informix documentation is excellent. Sun was excellent. Microsoft just doesn't do anything vaguely comparable. And since they have so many excellent models to choose from I don't see any excuse for it.
-
Yeah, so basically what you're saying is I'm 5 years out of date. I knew that! But I'm not ashamed. Prior to spending my 4 1/2 years in limbo, I got to do some pretty cool stuff. BTW: Here's another one for you: WYSIWYG! I asked someone if they'd ever heard that term the other day. What a look they gave me. "Huh?! What planet are you from, anyway." I like your ad with the disclaimer. Make the letters big please. But, the tech exec in the big company doesn't need to know Jack Whats-his-name because there are web sites with tech questions for every occasion. Some even supply the answers. I almost went for a 3 month boot camp myself but, for the price I, figured I could do better on my own.
OldDog.Net wrote: I almost went for a 3 month boot camp myself but, for the price I, figured I could do better on my own. Personally, I'm self taught, and I find most of the guys I work with are as well. Saying that there are a few who did computer science as degrees. Meself I did physics, and at the same time always had an interest in programmming since I was a kid. OldDog.Net wrote: WYSIWYG I rememeber that. The holy grail of DTP - another one. We take it all for granted these days.
"Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+
-
There is WAY to much information (and lack there of) in the Microsoft environment that is not available without going spelunking to Hell and back. I've got a library of 17 books just on ADO.Net, ASP.Net, C#, the Framework, DHTML & Javascript. (At about $50 pop (list anyway) and all are about to be obsoleted by .Net 2.) Most of them seem to completely ignore a lot of the more difficult and distasteful issues. IMHO, MSDN is hypertext Hell. They document the crap out of indivdual parameters but never explain how they are meant to be used together. And the circular references, Jeez! The Internet resources, like The Code Project, do a great job of sharing information and techniques but seldom point to any underlying documentation. The search for documentation combined with trial-and-error are HUGELY inefficient time-wise. So, why am I here? Trying to get some skills that'll keep me in pancakes and fuel oil. Damn, I miss IBM and Oracle documentation! Sorry, I just had to vent. ;P Will
If you could speak directly to someone that manages MSDN Online, how would you improve it? Tom Archer - Visual C++ MVP Archer Consulting Group.com
-
If you could speak directly to someone that manages MSDN Online, how would you improve it? Tom Archer - Visual C++ MVP Archer Consulting Group.com
I don't have a problem with most of the MSDN content, but one thing that needs doing is clear and concise overviews of technologies. (Those 19 pages long overviews they have for some things now isn't good enough, I want an overview not a technical demonstration.) MSDN suffers big-time from Information Overload.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
-
If you could speak directly to someone that manages MSDN Online, how would you improve it? Tom Archer - Visual C++ MVP Archer Consulting Group.com
I think I've already answered that question a bunch of times but maybe you haven't read the entire thread. Anyway, in my experience elsewhere, on a particular subject there are generally two documents provided by the vendor; the Reference and the Users Guide. I think that MSDN does a fair job as a Reference but falls way short as a Users Guide. As other people have responded, there isn't enough information putting the details into context. The Reference doesn't stand on it's own. So many of the descriptions of parameters are unhelpful and the "Remarks" sections need to be beefed up a LOT. Personally, I like the linear structure of books. When you add hyperlinks to that structure you have the best of both worlds. (I'm waiting for a hyperlink that can offer mor than one path (like an index) because you can only hyperlink from one place to one other place.) For my taste, MSDN has too many small stand alone modules that tease, don't flow, and leave me wanting much more.
-
There is WAY to much information (and lack there of) in the Microsoft environment that is not available without going spelunking to Hell and back. I've got a library of 17 books just on ADO.Net, ASP.Net, C#, the Framework, DHTML & Javascript. (At about $50 pop (list anyway) and all are about to be obsoleted by .Net 2.) Most of them seem to completely ignore a lot of the more difficult and distasteful issues. IMHO, MSDN is hypertext Hell. They document the crap out of indivdual parameters but never explain how they are meant to be used together. And the circular references, Jeez! The Internet resources, like The Code Project, do a great job of sharing information and techniques but seldom point to any underlying documentation. The search for documentation combined with trial-and-error are HUGELY inefficient time-wise. So, why am I here? Trying to get some skills that'll keep me in pancakes and fuel oil. Damn, I miss IBM and Oracle documentation! Sorry, I just had to vent. ;P Will
Ok, I've been using Query Analyzer from my SQL Server 200 install. I thought, "Hey, VS.Net has that built in. Why not use that?" 1. Wouldn't "Tools" be the logical place for something like that? 2. So, I have "Query" checked off in my Toolbars selections and I can see it but it's greyed out. 3. I go to the Server Explorer and fool around in there for a bit, right clicking everything in sight. The SQL (and most other buttons) on the Query tool bar remain inaccessible. 4. I go to Help. Why isn't there a "What's This?" like in the Office products. Now I'm in the locally installed MSDN off the CDs. I finally find "Help [Visual Studio.Net]", click it and (drum roll) "Empty Index Entry". 5. I connect to the Internet and go to MSDN Online. After a few minutes I'm at the MSDN Library and Visual Studio.Net. 6. I select "Visual Database Tools". Basically, at list of links with a one sentence explination. 7. I try "Database Queries and Visual Database Tools". Another list, no info. 8. Ok, "Query and View Designer". How to use it, what the components are. NO CLUE AS TO HOW TO GET THERE. And that's not even what I really want to know. WTF?! And on and on and on. I wasted 1/2 and hour searching. I'm anrgy, frustrated, and lost my whole train of concentration. And all I want to do is use one of the very simplest features. 9. Finally, I went back and after fooling around a while, I found that AT THE TABLE LEVEL there is a "Retrieve Data From Table". But before you have a chance to filter, it retrieves EVERY COLUMN of EVERY ROW. That's rediculous.
-
OldDog.Net wrote: Trying to learn and work with Microsoft products is like trying to herd cats Actually... herding cats is a metaphor often misused since someone who actually knows domesticated cats will know how to herd them. I have herded 4 at a time at my previous residence, and 9 for a friend. Much easier than any Microsoft product. just loudly open a can of tuna waft it over the cats and then walk where you want to go, they will all herd themselves. :) _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
fat_boy wrote: well, technically that is not herding cats, that is luring them. well, technically from the root word, there is not herding cats as they do not have a herding instinct to utilize (neither do most of the cattle herded today either, one of their problems is the complete lack of self-protection instinct and/or herding instinct). However, herding has grown to a broader usage as more animals have been grouped and moved, so "herding" is anymore simply the movement of a group as a group. By your definition you cannot herd hourses either, if you have ever done so you know you direct the stallion, the horses will follow the stallion, so there too you are luring the group. Same with a herd of elephants, they follow the matriarch. Any appropriate method is herding by definition anymore. :) herd·ed, herd·ing, herds v. intr. To come together in a herd: The sheep herded for warmth. v. tr. 1. To gather, keep, or drive (animals) in a herd. 2. To tend (sheep or cattle). 3. To gather and place into a group or mass: herded the children into the auditorium. _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
fat_boy wrote: well, technically that is not herding cats, that is luring them. well, technically from the root word, there is not herding cats as they do not have a herding instinct to utilize (neither do most of the cattle herded today either, one of their problems is the complete lack of self-protection instinct and/or herding instinct). However, herding has grown to a broader usage as more animals have been grouped and moved, so "herding" is anymore simply the movement of a group as a group. By your definition you cannot herd hourses either, if you have ever done so you know you direct the stallion, the horses will follow the stallion, so there too you are luring the group. Same with a herd of elephants, they follow the matriarch. Any appropriate method is herding by definition anymore. :) herd·ed, herd·ing, herds v. intr. To come together in a herd: The sheep herded for warmth. v. tr. 1. To gather, keep, or drive (animals) in a herd. 2. To tend (sheep or cattle). 3. To gather and place into a group or mass: herded the children into the auditorium. _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
Oh come on, cattle have a natrural herding instinct as do horses, and I would say all animals that are prey. They all form herds as a defense. Look at wildebeast, spingbock, zebra, all form herds, therfore all have natural herding instinct. So 'herding' a group of animals is keeping them in a closely formed group, ie, in a herd. Luring a number of cats with a tin of tuna will not keep themin a closely formed group, it will meerly encourage them to move towards the tin, regardless fromn which side of the room they started. Nunc est bibendum!
-
Oh come on, cattle have a natrural herding instinct as do horses, and I would say all animals that are prey. They all form herds as a defense. Look at wildebeast, spingbock, zebra, all form herds, therfore all have natural herding instinct. So 'herding' a group of animals is keeping them in a closely formed group, ie, in a herd. Luring a number of cats with a tin of tuna will not keep themin a closely formed group, it will meerly encourage them to move towards the tin, regardless fromn which side of the room they started. Nunc est bibendum!
fat_boy wrote: Oh come on, cattle have a natrural herding instinct as do horses horses still do the mares herd with the stallion, most of the cattle breeds no longer do. They leave their children behind, they wander off by themselves, they do not defend children. It is one of the largest complaints on bringing back the wolves, with the exception of the Brahma and Longhorn breeds, the most popular breeds must be fenced to keep herded. most of their instinct has been dumbed down to the point of being effectively removed, they are effectively defenseless. They can no longer run cattle herds as they used to, you pretty much have to pack them and truck them, they simply will not run together, they will not form a "herd". However, the point of movement of any group of animals is called herding, thus herding children, herding cats, etc. Herding (movement of a group) is no longer a term only used for animals that form herds, thus any method (ask a teacher about the kids) is legal. :) _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)