Are we heading the correct direction??

Germyan

Hardware is getting relatively slow every day though they say they are increasing the power.. Software also getting slow every day though they say they are user friendly.. I am just thinking.. Are we running toward the wrong direction.. I just thought that some one (at the very beginning) has started running toward the wrong direction, and we are (now) a group of fools who are following him, not knowing where we are going. I think that one day, we will have to stop every thing and think.. Look at mathematical world it is only each individuals find theories and define the way to use it... and so it is very effective.. But in software world, one guy is finding one for something but some one else,, is understand it in a totaly different way and using it for some thing else... (SOAP would be a good example, again now every one want to use XML for everything) We all a group of fools... G -- modified at 8:39 Wednesday 25th October, 2006

benjymous

It's not a new phenomenon - every time Intel(/AMD) have come out with a newer faster processor, MS have come out with a more complex version of Windows, so the speed boost seems to get lost. Have you ever tried running Win3.1 on a modern PC? It's scarily fast! (You can install the whole thing in a RAM disk for extra zippiness!)

-- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit! Buzzwords!

Super Lloyd

Try Vista, it's faster I was told... ;)

Marc Clifton

Germyan wrote:

I am just thinking..

Really? I couldn't tell.

Germyan wrote:

Are we running toward the wrong direction

Um, no. We are actually all running in different directions, and what we do in our direction is sometimes useful in someone elses direction. Eventually, a lot gets done by everyone. Something may not be the best fit (like XML), but it's the best choice at the moment.

Germyan wrote:

We all a group of fools...

Speak for yourself. Marc

Thyme In The Country

People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith

V 0

And what stops you from making better and faster hardware and software? You'll get stinkin' rich, you know that ;P

V.
Stop smoking so you can: Enjoy longer the money you save. Moviereview Archive

J4amieC

You know what , I think you're right. What we all need is, like, a compiler that understands plain english, with a built in file editor, page layout utility and compiler written in its own language.

--- How to get answers to your questions[^]

Dan Neely

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

Mike Ellison

Hmmm.

Germyan wrote:

(SOAP would be a good example, again now every one want to use XML for everything)

Nope. Good developers, like any artist, understand the tools and techniques available to them and competently choose which to use under which circumstances. Perhaps your thinking is too limited here. Perhaps you find yourself among a few bad programmers.

Germyan wrote:

We all a group of fools...

I'm building real software applications that solve real problems, making the office and institution I work for tangibly more efficient. Many others are doing the same. Is that what you mean by "fool"?

Member 96

Actually in testing here on the same computer with other os's it *is* faster.

El Corazon

Germyan wrote:

Hardware is getting relatively slow every day though they say they are increasing the power.. Software also getting slow every day though they say they are user friendly..

I don't agree with that. I guess it all comes down to what YOU do with what YOU are given. You can say what ever you want, that is your right. Or you can parrot what ever you have been told, that is your right. But don't think you don't have a part in things. The Virtual Test Range: (Unix) In 1994 I did my prototype on a 2 processor SGI reality engine (unknown processor) In 1996 we ran full scale at 20hz 350 real-time objects on an SGI R10000, 16processor, $1 million machine We ran 10m B&W imagery or 30m Color, 120m elevation posting Common Console Advanced Graphics Engine (first Windows) In 1999 we ran on a 4 processor 500Mhz (Specialized workstation) at 30m color, 120m elevation data, same land area, but a 1km per pixel earth drawn behind, same speed, same inputs. In 2001, we ran on a 2 processor Commercial Off The Shelf hardware, finally! We boosted the resolution to 4m B&W and color, 30m elevation, and extended the land area 50%, boosted the speed up to 30hz and the number of inputs to 500 real-time objects transitioned from CCAVE to Real-time Advanced Graphics Engine (RAGE) 2001 to 2003 In 2005, we were running full color 4m, 30m elevation with 1m high resolution "patches" at "interesting" locations, extended the area another 50% and extended depth precision on rendering to full double precision and beyond, still running 30hz. In late 2005 (Nov) we unvieled the first fielded, augmented graphics system, embedding live video directly into the 3D environment at 30hz without dropping frames on either live or virtual, while boosting the number of real-time inputs to 1000. Now we are running the same thing on laptops, and dual core gaming machines. Say what ever you want, but you will never convince me that things have "slowed" down, only that YOU have slowed down. I eat technology for breakfast. :)

_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

Germyan

that is why I said Relatively slow...

Germyan

Narrow minded... think out of the box.. think what can be done.. don't think that what you have done is the most complex thing ever done.. Selection of building computer base on the famous tool "Abacus" is the first mistake,, second would be the 0, 1 bit and it's all related stuff, third is choosing hardware to build computers.. I don't no what option we have but I see that end is not far away.. if not we have to change the direction G

Germyan

Mike Ellison wrote:

few bad programmers.

mmm really.. You being good does matter when the *majority* is doing it worng..

Mike Ellison wrote:

more efficient. Many others are doing the same. Is that what you mean by "fool"?

hahaha.... this is where I called people does not think out of the box.. why is that *more*, have you ever thought what would have done if you have much much faster systems.. G

Germyan

fdsfsdf'dsd jfgdsafh's bfsd'df fsdf--- fdsfghhj-90ufsdjf G

Germyan

probably yes if it is damp fast.. G

Germyan

I am thinking man... every day.. morning to evening... G

Germyan

Marc Clifton wrote:

Really? I couldn't tell.

You know, I have not found any body to tell when some one else thinking.. but I guess I just found a one who can.... stick to the main point!!

Marc Clifton wrote:

Um, no. We are actually all running in different directions, and what we do in our direction is sometimes useful in someone elses direction. Eventually, a lot gets done by everyone. Something may not be the best fit (like XML), but it's the best choice at the moment.

Very good... you will very well fit to the current system.. you will never ever think out of the box.. once some thing is given with its definitions, you will show your mastery inside that box... but never think to change the definitions or the box... people like you also needed

Marc Clifton wrote:

Speak for yourself.

You mean like you did here... :-) G

Germyan

ohooo.. let me try... after 8 hours writting.. I just tried and found that it is even slower.. :-( G

Nirosh

I agree that any one who is good at his/her profession is a one who know how to use the available tool set to his maximum adavantage.. but..

Mike Ellison wrote:

Nope. Good developers, like any artist, understand the tools and techniques available to them and competently choose which to use under which circumstances. Perhaps your thinking is too limited here. Perhaps you find yourself among a few bad programmers.

I think "G" is talking about the tools and techniques but not the way we are using them.. and he is asking whether the way, we build these tool and techiniques are correct... I think the base system architecture (hardware as well as software) seems to have their limitations.. even thought I am not fully agree with what Germyan is telling I think we all agree that we are going on a journey, with not knowing the end .. When too many descrete resource get involve in finding some thing, it more often than not spoil the soup.. as he pointed out.. XML is invented by some one with a purpose, but at the other end of the world some one else (descretely) is using it for something else.. Again some one may introduce a new concept with a one goal (Is OKI - Open Knowledge Initiative still in use??) but some one else may use it to acheive a goal totally oposite to the initial goal look at what happen by year 2000, Y2K issue ... I think what initial poster is telling have much more depth than most of the repliers think.. but I can be a fool :-)

L.W.C. Nirosh, Colombo, Sri Lanka.

Marc Clifton

Germyan wrote:

you will never ever think out of the box

:laugh: Have you even looked at the articles I've written, or my website, or the open source MyXaml project, or my Interacx architecture? I'll tell you something. I'm known for not thinking in the box. Marc

Thyme In The Country

People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith