It solves the problem of being emotionally connected to the job.
Maybe it doesn't materially change the day-to-day work, but it's a completely different experience when you can sit back and and get paid $100/hr while other people do stupid things.
You clearly did not read the posting you're commenting on. Nowhere does he say he made a game. Nowhere does he say he's never tried to find his own solutions. Nowhere does he say he hasn't done well. In fact he stated the opposite. He is no longer doing well because Google broke their own shit and don't seem to be in any particular hurry to address it. In case you missed it: Out of Milk went from doing extremely well to dead in the water almost overnight. We are working as hard we can to try and figure out solutions from our own end, but Google is the guy driving this bus and we can only do so much on our own.
Google's market problems aren't app developers responsibility to overcome just because they are 'sort of known'.
This has caused our purchases to fall from doing very well to almost getting no purchases at all.
I think you missed this line. Presumably they were doing quite well for themselves, got nailed by some change Google made, and now are not recouping any costs due to all the lost sales.
Sadly, bryanlarsen is correct about Google's culture, especially when it comes to the code they've written: the search code is doing what we told it to and there won't be any reconsideration of decisions made about code.
I think it's true that there is a huge opportunity for someone like Amazon here.
However, I rather disagree that Amazon will ever provide a panacea. The Amazon market currently poses its own problems to app sellers. Once your app is on their market, you do not control it.
Amazon sets the price, Amazon sets the description and classification. If Amazon hires some marketing copy-writer to write your app's description and that person doesn't know anything about your app, guess who gets to deal with angry customers who didn't get what they were expecting? It won't be Amazon.
Amazon has had some technical hangups that be explained by 'early product bugs'. While I expect such problems to be eventually ironed out by better QA and development processes, my understanding is that they have not yet been ironed out.
Finally, the Amazon market is tiny compared to Google's. If I told you that putting your software on Amazon's market would net you 5% of the sales you get on Google's, but you'd spend just as much time fighting through problems in the market itself, would you jump on that opportunity? I probably would not.
I've found plenty of helpful information on StackOverflow via Google as well, but I definitely would not say that it "really really works."
I've asked two questions (C#/.NET so there's a large pool of potential answerers) and neither question ever got the answer it deserved, even though both got answers from genuine experts (Jon Skeet and Eric Lippert). I found the answer to my first question on some MSDN blog after I asked on StackOverflow, the second question is still unresolved.
You've made over a dozen posts in this discussion making factual claims without posting a single link to back up your assertions. Coupled with this ridiculousness: "I believe the left does not really care about people, especially poor people, at all" you can't seriously be miffed that people aren't putting in a lot of effort to refute your positions.
Yup, the whole point of putting a `Like` button your page is so that site visitors can broadcast your page to their friends. However, to cause that broadcast to actually occur you have to put a bunch of Open Graph meta tags on your page and also (I think?) have a registered Facebook Application to go along with your site.
There's no place that's documented except for the developer forums.
I couldn't agree more with this article (though I sadly can't say 'no' to Facebook development). I recently did a tiny amount of Facebook integration into a site and it was horrific.
All I wanted to do was add a `Like` button that would broadcast to the clicker's friends timeline. What could be simpler? Just copy and paste their code onto your page and you're done. Right?
The second sentence on their documentation page says "when the user clicks the Like button on your site, a story appears in the user's friends' News Feed with a link back to your website."
But it turns out that's not true. It turns out you have to jump through all kinds of hoops to get that behavior. The documentation for their simplest and most used integration feature couldn't go one paragraph without falsehood.
It's pretty easy to imagine that when Gosling was employed by Sun, he enjoyed significant power to shape his own job. Under Oracle, he clearly did not have the power to make his own job into what he wanted.
It's not much of a stretch to believe that lower-tier technical staff didn't have that power to begin with, and hence did not feel the same sting of new management.
I don't doubt that you'd accept the occasional inconvenience to other people. Try having your own money taken away from you and report back to us about the "inconvenience."
DotNetNuke, also known as DNN, is the ideal platform for building professional websites with dynamic content and interactive features.
This made me laugh. My coworkers that have worked with DNN have many horror stories. I've never heard from a developer that used DNN and liked it. Given the superficiality of the descriptions, I assume all the info was copy/pasted from the marketing material for each project.
I found that quote particularly hilarious given the article in which it is embedded. The article would make a good reference for the wikipedia article on cognitive dissonance.
That very observation is included in the "Key Judgements" section.
"The Wikileaks.org Web site could be used to post fabricated information, misinformation, disinformation, or propaganda and could be used in perception management and influence operations to convey a positive or negative message to specific target audiences that view or retrieve information from the Web site."
If you think a feature that could potentially behave differently in RELEASE and DEBUG modes is problematic, you'll want to avoid floats and doubles in .NET. Runtime optimizations that do calculations in the processor's 80-bit FPU can alter the results of float/double calculations. My personal example: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2225503/clr-jit-optimizat...
I'm no CLR JIT expert, but I'm not sure you even need to recompile. It sounds to me that you just need to run your existing tail-calling code on the .NET 4 x64 CLR, presuming your current code has ``tail'' opcodes.
I've been working on a codepad.org clone for .NET languages: http://dotnetpad.net
It's been a ton of fun. I do CMS development in my day job and it's nice to build a site that actually does something instead of corporate brochure-ware :)