On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 23:00 -0500, Jeremy H. wrote:
improvements, because we are afraid of both success and failure.
The infamous analysis paralysis syndrome. I’ve seen it first hand, and
I sympathize. Fortunately it has been the exception rather than the
non-linearly as team size increases?
yes … that is why individual teams are generally kept to less than six
people. The rule of thumb is that after six people the cost of
management is more than the cost of the team.
My company has more than 20,000 IT employees, about 2500 of which are
or have some resemblance to a programmer/developer. I’ve worked here
for 8 years and manage a technology team. I’m familiar with our
controls, why we have them and why they contribute to the problem more
than the solution.
Our company is similar sized, but we have about 1/5th the number of IT
people, of whom about just under half are programmers and a similar
number are technical support people. The remainder are management/team
The battle for the enterprise is not worth winning, why fight it.
Because if you can win there, you can win anywhere. In the enterprise,
you win by making the best bottom line consistently. You achieve the
best bottom line through good communication and technical excellence.
Maybe in some places. Around here you pretty much need good powerpoint.
Ugh … my condolences.
Ruby and Rails have a very good foundation, but they need a little more
maturity to enter that market and win decisively. J2EE has essentially
failed, client/server technologies are largely a fad of the past, and
people are unwilling to go back to CICS screens. The spot for Ruby and
Rails is open if the platform can provide the technical underpinnings to
make it work.
Interesting. Did client/server fail?
I don’t see much C/S work happening any more. The job market is pretty
slim for C/S apps programmers right now.
Not really. Yeah, we had .dll
hell but in general people liked those applications much better than
anyone ever liked a J2EE app.
Me too, but the cost of deploying our suite of C/S apps to thousands of
machines across the country was prohibitive. The web environment
sacrifices ease of use for cheaper (but not easier) deployment. Rails
provides the core for faster development and easier deployment of web
apps (better bottom line) if it could fully meet the technical
requirements. The formalization of AJAX as a middle ground between C/S
and Browsing, and Rails natural support for that platform, really puts
Ruby and Rails in the right position to become a serious contender.
I have users that still like certain
character-based DOS apps and CICS apps better than anything that has
supplanted them because they are faster and more efficient than waving
a mouse around.
I understand fully. You can whip through 10 CICS screens in the time it
takes one web page to render in the browser.
Yet J2EE kicked unimaginable butt for years. Why? I’m
sure it has nothing to do with bottom lines, good communication or
marketing … but it has failed to deliver on the hype. It is a good
technology, but it has not reduced the bottom line or improved the IT
experience. Servlets succeeded, but much of the rest of the J2EE
platform failed. For example, EJB’s failure is exemplified by the
adoption of the competing “hibernate” technology as the core of EJB 3.
The time is right for a competitor to rise up.
I’m all for communication, and I don’t drink the agile kool-aid
either. But I have no respect for the decisions that come out of
corporate bodies, and I wouldn’t be swayed by it as a developer
looking for the best framework to solve my business problems; I’d
apply my knowledge of the feature-set to my problems at hand.