<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:pingback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/pingback/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Knowing.NET</title>
    <link>http://www.knowing.net/</link>
    <description>Software development industry analysis by Larry O'Brien, the former editor of Software Development and Computer Language</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Larry O'Brien</copyright>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:20:14 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>newtelligence dasBlog 1.9.7174.0</generator>
    <managingEditor>lobrien@knowing.net</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>lobrien@knowing.net</webMaster>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=3fe68f89-af8a-434c-a54d-95ff63eea36a</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,3fe68f89-af8a-434c-a54d-95ff63eea36a.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
The June 2008 CACM contains the article "<a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=3fe68f89-af8a-434c-a54d-95ff63eea36a&amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fportal.acm.org%2fcitation.cfm%3fid%3d1349026.1349044%26coll%3dACM%26dl%3dACM%26idx%3dJ79%26part%3dmagazine%26WantType%3dMagazines%26title%3dCommunications%2520of%2520the%2520ACM">A
Risk Profile of Offshore-Outsourced Development Projects</a>"
</p>
        <p>
Since this is a common profile, I thought I'd reproduce the Top 10 Risks. Some of
these are universal across all project profiles ("Lack of top management commitment"),
but others are definitely more problematic for offshored projects. I've highlighted
those I think are notably different. All of these should be addressed in your project
planning...
</p>
        <ol>
          <li>
Lack of top management commitment</li>
          <li>
Original set of requirements is miscommunicated</li>
          <li>
Language barriers in project communication</li>
          <li>
            <b>Inadequate user involvement</b>
          </li>
          <li>
            <b>Lack of offshore project management know-how by client</b>
          </li>
          <li>
Failure to manage end-user expectations</li>
          <li>
            <b>Poor change controls</b>
          </li>
          <li>
Lack of business known-how by offshore teams</li>
          <li>
            <b>Lack of required technical know-how by offshore team</b>
          </li>
          <li>
Failure to consider all costs</li>
        </ol>
        <p>
That's not to say that I think the ones I did not highlight are unimportant, it's
just that I think you can run into those issues onshore (if you replace "language
barriers" with "poor communication skills").
</p>
        <p>
Inadequate user involvement and poor change controls are, I think, more acute risks
with offshore-outsourced projects because there's a certain amount of "out of site,
out of mind" to these projects. It's not like people are hearing programmers talk
around the watercooler or at lunch; offshore projects have a greater risk of 'going
dark' for long periods of time. Similarly, with different working hours, different
holiday schedules, etc., I think it's considerably more common for offshore work to
get off the change-control rails. You really need to do daily check-ins with offshore
teams, just like you do with local teams. It's harder and slower than a standup meeting,
but I think it's definitely a necessary part of the daily routine.
</p>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=3fe68f89-af8a-434c-a54d-95ff63eea36a" />
      </body>
      <title>Risk Factors for Offshore-Outsourced Development Projects</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,3fe68f89-af8a-434c-a54d-95ff63eea36a.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,3fe68f89-af8a-434c-a54d-95ff63eea36a.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:20:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
The June 2008 CACM contains the article "&lt;a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=3fe68f89-af8a-434c-a54d-95ff63eea36a&amp;amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fportal.acm.org%2fcitation.cfm%3fid%3d1349026.1349044%26coll%3dACM%26dl%3dACM%26idx%3dJ79%26part%3dmagazine%26WantType%3dMagazines%26title%3dCommunications%2520of%2520the%2520ACM"&gt;A
Risk Profile of Offshore-Outsourced Development Projects&lt;/a&gt;"
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Since this is a common profile, I thought I'd reproduce the Top 10 Risks. Some of
these are universal across all project profiles ("Lack of top management commitment"),
but others are definitely more problematic for offshored projects. I've highlighted
those I think are notably different. All of these should be addressed in your project
planning...
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Lack of top management commitment&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Original set of requirements is miscommunicated&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Language barriers in project communication&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;b&gt;Inadequate user involvement&lt;/b&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;b&gt;Lack of offshore project management know-how by client&lt;/b&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Failure to manage end-user expectations&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;b&gt;Poor change controls&lt;/b&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Lack of business known-how by offshore teams&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;b&gt;Lack of required technical know-how by offshore team&lt;/b&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Failure to consider all costs&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
That's not to say that I think the ones I did not highlight are unimportant, it's
just that I think you can run into those issues onshore (if you replace "language
barriers" with "poor communication skills").
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Inadequate user involvement and poor change controls are, I think, more acute risks
with offshore-outsourced projects because there's a certain amount of "out of site,
out of mind" to these projects. It's not like people are hearing programmers talk
around the watercooler or at lunch; offshore projects have a greater risk of 'going
dark' for long periods of time. Similarly, with different working hours, different
holiday schedules, etc., I think it's considerably more common for offshore work to
get off the change-control rails. You really need to do daily check-ins with offshore
teams, just like you do with local teams. It's harder and slower than a standup meeting,
but I think it's definitely a necessary part of the daily routine.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=3fe68f89-af8a-434c-a54d-95ff63eea36a" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=4db6920a-b4ad-4db6-99e2-95d5f821b2b1</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,4db6920a-b4ad-4db6-99e2-95d5f821b2b1.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
I have a client who needs a Web-page component that does some photo compositing. Nothing
super-fancy, but it needs to be professional, obey some business rules, and do some
things dynamically based on static data.
</p>
        <p>
The prototype is in Flash, but is filled with hideous programming -- magic numbers,
a big monolithic function, etc. Today, the client said that they would be willing
to accept the installed-base problem of Silverlight if I recommended it.
</p>
        <p>
Well... It seems to me: Flash's programming story remains, if not terrible, nothing
to write home about. Silverlight's programming story is pretty stellar -- a vast programming
base from which I can draw the people to do the business rules and dynamic stuff (i.e.,
the programming). Flash may be beloved by designers, but for photo-compositing, I
don't see a great advantage over WPF / Silverlight. 
</p>
        <p>
Am I wrong?
</p>
        <p>
One way or the other, if you're a great Flash programmer or have some experience in
Silverlight, I'm hiring... Drop me a line direct at lobrien -at- knowing -dot- net.
</p>
        <p>
          <span style="color:red">Update:</span> "Not fair to compare poorly written Flash to
green-field Silverlight" was one comment, but I am not comparing the <i>code</i>,
I am comparing the code-creation possibilities (and, to some extent, the ecosystem.
I think I want people who see the task as programming, not people who see the task
as a design issue). "Try Flex," came a message from Adobe, which is certainly fair
-- we have a prototype in Flash, Flex has a better programming story than Flash-the-development-environment,
Flash is universal. Still looking for developers, but now I'll throw "Flex developers"
into the mix as well...
</p>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=4db6920a-b4ad-4db6-99e2-95d5f821b2b1" />
      </body>
      <title>Throwing over Flash for Silverlight...Wise?</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,4db6920a-b4ad-4db6-99e2-95d5f821b2b1.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,4db6920a-b4ad-4db6-99e2-95d5f821b2b1.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 06:26:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
I have a client who needs a Web-page component that does some photo compositing. Nothing
super-fancy, but it needs to be professional, obey some business rules, and do some
things dynamically based on static data.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The prototype is in Flash, but is filled with hideous programming -- magic numbers,
a big monolithic function, etc. Today, the client said that they would be willing
to accept the installed-base problem of Silverlight if I recommended it.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Well... It seems to me: Flash's programming story remains, if not terrible, nothing
to write home about. Silverlight's programming story is pretty stellar -- a vast programming
base from which I can draw the people to do the business rules and dynamic stuff (i.e.,
the programming). Flash may be beloved by designers, but for photo-compositing, I
don't see a great advantage over WPF / Silverlight. 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Am I wrong?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
One way or the other, if you're a great Flash programmer or have some experience in
Silverlight, I'm hiring... Drop me a line direct at lobrien -at- knowing -dot- net.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;span style="color:red"&gt;Update:&lt;/span&gt; "Not fair to compare poorly written Flash to
green-field Silverlight" was one comment, but I am not comparing the &lt;i&gt;code&lt;/i&gt;,
I am comparing the code-creation possibilities (and, to some extent, the ecosystem.
I think I want people who see the task as programming, not people who see the task
as a design issue). "Try Flex," came a message from Adobe, which is certainly fair
-- we have a prototype in Flash, Flex has a better programming story than Flash-the-development-environment,
Flash is universal. Still looking for developers, but now I'll throw "Flex developers"
into the mix as well...
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=4db6920a-b4ad-4db6-99e2-95d5f821b2b1" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=c0a4178f-6481-450a-9aa4-33f9dbf56624</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,c0a4178f-6481-450a-9aa4-33f9dbf56624.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Daniel Choi has created a Ruby gem that
consolidates feeds into a Kindle-readable format! Say aloha to paying $2 to subscribe
to a single blog! <a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=c0a4178f-6481-450a-9aa4-33f9dbf56624&amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fdanielchoi.com%2fsoftware%2fkindle-feeds.html">link</a><img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=c0a4178f-6481-450a-9aa4-33f9dbf56624" /></body>
      <title>RSS/ATOM Feeds -&gt; Kindle</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,c0a4178f-6481-450a-9aa4-33f9dbf56624.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,c0a4178f-6481-450a-9aa4-33f9dbf56624.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:59:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>Daniel Choi has created a Ruby gem that consolidates feeds into a Kindle-readable format! Say aloha to paying $2 to subscribe to a single blog!

&lt;a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=c0a4178f-6481-450a-9aa4-33f9dbf56624&amp;amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fdanielchoi.com%2fsoftware%2fkindle-feeds.html"&gt;link&lt;/a&gt; &lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=c0a4178f-6481-450a-9aa4-33f9dbf56624" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=9278762b-c2e5-4d47-923f-ffb8361b3c0c</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,9278762b-c2e5-4d47-923f-ffb8361b3c0c.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
The Midori coverage from SD Times has gone mainstream, even making the front page
of <a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=9278762b-c2e5-4d47-923f-ffb8361b3c0c&amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fnews.bbc.co.uk%2f2%2fhi%2ftechnology%2f7540282.stm">BBC
World News</a> this morning. Since I reviewed the technical portions of the documents
for the story, I thought I might clarify some things. First, though:
</p>
        <ul>
          <li>
I have no idea who wrote the document</li>
          <li>
I have no idea how SD Times came into possession of the document</li>
          <li>
I have no idea when the document was written</li>
        </ul>
        <p>
For all I know, what I reviewed <i>might</i> have been the musings of some 14-year-old
in Novosobirsk. A very technical 14-year-old, but who knows?
</p>
        <p>
Substantively, what I can say is that the documents were quite technical and were
quite provocative -- they weren't a retrospective on Singularity that we conflated
into a discussion of a future OS. The technicality of the documents actually gave
me some pause: the unguarded tone and technical depth made me think "this is a long
way from being a press release."
</p>
        <p>
          <i>Taking the documents at face value,</i> they laid out a very aggressive, very ambitious,
scenario for Midori. By "aggressive" and "ambitious," what I mean is that the author
really grabs the bull by the horns and addresses concurrency and legacy head-on. Although
there's a lot of talk in the analysis about "how is this going to work with legacy
Windows" what's interesting to me, personally, is that the technical path being discussed
is not a mealy-mouthed "we have to acknowledge the concurrent era" but rather is a
full-throated "we have to reinvent what we talk about when we talk about OS."
</p>
        <p>
What I read was the <i>type</i> of stance that some people don't think happens at
Microsoft. I was impressed. ("It's all about concurrency": Larry is impressed. What
a surprise.) Was it a deliberately leaked trial balloon? I dunno'.
</p>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=9278762b-c2e5-4d47-923f-ffb8361b3c0c" />
      </body>
      <title>Some Aspects of the Midori Story from SD Times</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,9278762b-c2e5-4d47-923f-ffb8361b3c0c.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,9278762b-c2e5-4d47-923f-ffb8361b3c0c.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 20:03:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
The Midori coverage from SD Times has gone mainstream, even making the front page
of &lt;a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=9278762b-c2e5-4d47-923f-ffb8361b3c0c&amp;amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fnews.bbc.co.uk%2f2%2fhi%2ftechnology%2f7540282.stm"&gt;BBC
World News&lt;/a&gt; this morning. Since I reviewed the technical portions of the documents
for the story, I thought I might clarify some things. First, though:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
I have no idea who wrote the document&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
I have no idea how SD Times came into possession of the document&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
I have no idea when the document was written&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
For all I know, what I reviewed &lt;i&gt;might&lt;/i&gt; have been the musings of some 14-year-old
in Novosobirsk. A very technical 14-year-old, but who knows?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Substantively, what I can say is that the documents were quite technical and were
quite provocative -- they weren't a retrospective on Singularity that we conflated
into a discussion of a future OS. The technicality of the documents actually gave
me some pause: the unguarded tone and technical depth made me think "this is a long
way from being a press release."
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;i&gt;Taking the documents at face value,&lt;/i&gt; they laid out a very aggressive, very ambitious,
scenario for Midori. By "aggressive" and "ambitious," what I mean is that the author
really grabs the bull by the horns and addresses concurrency and legacy head-on. Although
there's a lot of talk in the analysis about "how is this going to work with legacy
Windows" what's interesting to me, personally, is that the technical path being discussed
is not a mealy-mouthed "we have to acknowledge the concurrent era" but rather is a
full-throated "we have to reinvent what we talk about when we talk about OS."
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
What I read was the &lt;i&gt;type&lt;/i&gt; of stance that some people don't think happens at
Microsoft. I was impressed. ("It's all about concurrency": Larry is impressed. What
a surprise.) Was it a deliberately leaked trial balloon? I dunno'.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=9278762b-c2e5-4d47-923f-ffb8361b3c0c" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
Via <a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc&amp;url=http%3a%2f%2ftwitter.com%2fMikeG1">Mike
Gunderloy</a> comes this link to the claim that a <a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc&amp;url=http%3a%2f%2f9to5mac.com%2fiphone-apps-developers-rich">crossword
puzzle app for the iPhone is bringing in the developer $2K per day</a>.
</p>
        <p>
A forthcoming column of mine observes that while Microsoft is still the absolute king
of corporate development, Apple has become increasingly appealing for development
of <i>retail</i> software.
</p>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc" />
      </body>
      <title>Crossword App for iPhone Making $2K / day</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2008 17:44:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
Via &lt;a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc&amp;amp;url=http%3a%2f%2ftwitter.com%2fMikeG1"&gt;Mike
Gunderloy&lt;/a&gt; comes this link to the claim that a &lt;a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc&amp;amp;url=http%3a%2f%2f9to5mac.com%2fiphone-apps-developers-rich"&gt;crossword
puzzle app for the iPhone is bringing in the developer $2K per day&lt;/a&gt;.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
A forthcoming column of mine observes that while Microsoft is still the absolute king
of corporate development, Apple has become increasingly appealing for development
of &lt;i&gt;retail&lt;/i&gt; software.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=bfd69fa5-c4e6-4367-9d9e-a397bebf10fc" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=7f18bbd2-3487-49de-9c3c-d4d2fb7e12ea</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,7f18bbd2-3487-49de-9c3c-d4d2fb7e12ea.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
I am aware of the irony that I talk a lot about software quality and the infrastructure
of this blog is... well, I think it's up more often than Twitter! ... 
</p>
        <p>
But, yes, I'm aware. The cobbler's children go barefoot, and all that...
</p>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=7f18bbd2-3487-49de-9c3c-d4d2fb7e12ea" />
      </body>
      <title>Cobbler's Children</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,7f18bbd2-3487-49de-9c3c-d4d2fb7e12ea.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,7f18bbd2-3487-49de-9c3c-d4d2fb7e12ea.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 21:29:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
I am aware of the irony that I talk a lot about software quality and the infrastructure
of this blog is... well, I think it's up more often than Twitter! ... 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But, yes, I'm aware. The cobbler's children go barefoot, and all that...
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=7f18bbd2-3487-49de-9c3c-d4d2fb7e12ea" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=5d1a3afc-1877-408c-b242-2f9d632f9332</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,5d1a3afc-1877-408c-b242-2f9d632f9332.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
Not only am I as old as dirt, I started programming professionally when I was 16.
So this may just be me being crotchety. But I <i>perceive</i> that the average quality
of the <i>code</i> in today's software projects is going down.
</p>
        <p>
That doesn't mean that software projects today don't have vastly more scope and power
than they did in the 1980s: they do. I'm just saying that when I engage with clients
nowadays, I brace myself to see "FORTRAN 77 written in <i>X</i>": huge monolithic
functions with essentially-global variables, deeply embedded loops, etc. Often, X
is a tag-based Web language (PHP, CF, ASP, etc.) but I'm not talking about "<a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=5d1a3afc-1877-408c-b242-2f9d632f9332&amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.knowing.net%2fPermaLink%2cguid%2cec3f4e38-2a89-4f4b-8824-af5807911491.aspx">tag
soup</a>" per se. It's not the particulars of markup and code that bother me, although
I do think:
</p>
        <ul>
          <li>
Tag-based Web languages facilitate imperative, drop-through programming</li>
          <li>
Tag-based Web languages are now a common early step on the "path to professional programming"</li>
          <li>
Therefore, tag-based Web languages aren't blameless</li>
        </ul>
        <p>
Although X is often tag-based, I perceive an increase in FORTRAN 77 written in the
more mainstream object-oriented languages such as C# and Java. (P.S. Please note that
I'm picking on FORTRAN 77; I'm aware that Fortran (no caps!) has evolved into a powerful
modern language.)
</p>
        <p>
What do you think: am I just being crotchety or are "kids today" increasing the probability
of experiencing really poor code? Take my self-selected, totally unscientific poll:
</p>
        <p style="color:red">
          <b>Update:</b> Guillaume Theorot makes the very fair point that kids "back in the
day" probably produced crap, too. I know I did. And coding has always been a young
person's job (while those who stay in SD <i>tend</i> to move into management). I would
guess that the median age of a person whose job is writing code is 30 or less. So
there's a lot of code out there written by people who are still in the first half-dozen
years of their professional career. So maybe the phenomenon is just that I had the
good fortune to have long periods of my career where I was dealing with people who
were significantly more experienced. Hmmm... depressingly logical.
</p>
        <p>
          <b>Update 2:</b> Implicit assumption -- FORTRAN 77 in X is not easier / faster to
produce than modular code. It may seem to be for the first 100 lines, but these 1,000-line
monoliths are inevitably fragile as heck and development has ground to a standstill.
</p>
        <br />
        <iframe frameborder="0" src="http://polls.zoho.com/external/lobrien/average-corporate-programming-quality-going-up-or-down" width="260" height="360">
        </iframe>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=5d1a3afc-1877-408c-b242-2f9d632f9332" />
      </body>
      <title>"Kids today": Is programming quality going up or going down?</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,5d1a3afc-1877-408c-b242-2f9d632f9332.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,5d1a3afc-1877-408c-b242-2f9d632f9332.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:56:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
Not only am I as old as dirt, I started programming professionally when I was 16.
So this may just be me being crotchety. But I &lt;i&gt;perceive&lt;/i&gt; that the average quality
of the &lt;i&gt;code&lt;/i&gt; in today's software projects is going down.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
That doesn't mean that software projects today don't have vastly more scope and power
than they did in the 1980s: they do. I'm just saying that when I engage with clients
nowadays, I brace myself to see "FORTRAN 77 written in &lt;i&gt;X&lt;/i&gt;": huge monolithic
functions with essentially-global variables, deeply embedded loops, etc. Often, X
is a tag-based Web language (PHP, CF, ASP, etc.) but I'm not talking about "&lt;a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=5d1a3afc-1877-408c-b242-2f9d632f9332&amp;amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.knowing.net%2fPermaLink%2cguid%2cec3f4e38-2a89-4f4b-8824-af5807911491.aspx"&gt;tag
soup&lt;/a&gt;" per se. It's not the particulars of markup and code that bother me, although
I do think:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Tag-based Web languages facilitate imperative, drop-through programming&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Tag-based Web languages are now a common early step on the "path to professional programming"&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
Therefore, tag-based Web languages aren't blameless&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Although X is often tag-based, I perceive an increase in FORTRAN 77 written in the
more mainstream object-oriented languages such as C# and Java. (P.S. Please note that
I'm picking on FORTRAN 77; I'm aware that Fortran (no caps!) has evolved into a powerful
modern language.)
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
What do you think: am I just being crotchety or are "kids today" increasing the probability
of experiencing really poor code? Take my self-selected, totally unscientific poll:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style="color:red"&gt;
&lt;b&gt;Update:&lt;/b&gt; Guillaume Theorot makes the very fair point that kids "back in the
day" probably produced crap, too. I know I did. And coding has always been a young
person's job (while those who stay in SD &lt;i&gt;tend&lt;/i&gt; to move into management). I would
guess that the median age of a person whose job is writing code is 30 or less. So
there's a lot of code out there written by people who are still in the first half-dozen
years of their professional career. So maybe the phenomenon is just that I had the
good fortune to have long periods of my career where I was dealing with people who
were significantly more experienced. Hmmm... depressingly logical.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;b&gt;Update 2:&lt;/b&gt; Implicit assumption -- FORTRAN 77 in X is not easier / faster to
produce than modular code. It may seem to be for the first 100 lines, but these 1,000-line
monoliths are inevitably fragile as heck and development has ground to a standstill.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;iframe frameborder='0' src='http://polls.zoho.com/external/lobrien/average-corporate-programming-quality-going-up-or-down' width='260' height='360'&gt;
&lt;/iframe&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=5d1a3afc-1877-408c-b242-2f9d632f9332" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=53d6677a-cad3-4a51-9703-975d13d9f9ea</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,53d6677a-cad3-4a51-9703-975d13d9f9ea.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
I have a job that is probably about 120 hours total work for a good Flash programmer.
By that, I mean I estimate that you could <i>probably</i> do it in about 30 hours,
but if you can deliver in 120, everyone is happy.
</p>
        <p>
The only caveat is that you need to be able to write ActionScript that's not an offense
to the profession of programming. I don't want to see scaling and positioning with
magic numbers:
</p>
        <pre>
	var FramePointDistance = ((Number(frame_Point[2])-Number(frame_Point[0])) + 15)/4;
	_root.main.frameMC._xscale = Math.floor((currentFramedistant/146)*100);
	_root.main.frameMC._yscale = Math.floor((currentFramedistant/146)*100);
	
	_root.main.frameMC._x = -(210 - (210 - _root.main.frameMC._width)/2) ;
	//showError(_root.main.frameMC._width +":"+currentFramedistant);
	//_root.main.frameMC._x = -(140 + main.frameMC.pic._width/4) ;_root.main.frameMC._x
	//_root.main.frameMC._y = -(130 + Math.floor(main.frameMC.pic._height/1.5)) ;// 
	_root.main.frameMC._y = -(127 + Math.floor(Number(frame_Point[1]))) ;
	
</pre>
        <p>
Drop me a line with salary requirement and availability at lobrien@knowing.net
</p>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=53d6677a-cad3-4a51-9703-975d13d9f9ea" />
      </body>
      <title>Hiring Freelance Flash Programmer...</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,53d6677a-cad3-4a51-9703-975d13d9f9ea.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,53d6677a-cad3-4a51-9703-975d13d9f9ea.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 04:41:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
I have a job that is probably about 120 hours total work for a good Flash programmer.
By that, I mean I estimate that you could &lt;i&gt;probably&lt;/i&gt; do it in about 30 hours,
but if you can deliver in 120, everyone is happy.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The only caveat is that you need to be able to write ActionScript that's not an offense
to the profession of programming. I don't want to see scaling and positioning with
magic numbers:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;pre&gt;
	var FramePointDistance = ((Number(frame_Point[2])-Number(frame_Point[0])) + 15)/4;
	_root.main.frameMC._xscale = Math.floor((currentFramedistant/146)*100);
	_root.main.frameMC._yscale = Math.floor((currentFramedistant/146)*100);
	
	_root.main.frameMC._x = -(210 - (210 - _root.main.frameMC._width)/2) ;
	//showError(_root.main.frameMC._width +":"+currentFramedistant);
	//_root.main.frameMC._x = -(140 + main.frameMC.pic._width/4) ;_root.main.frameMC._x
	//_root.main.frameMC._y = -(130 + Math.floor(main.frameMC.pic._height/1.5)) ;// 
	_root.main.frameMC._y = -(127 + Math.floor(Number(frame_Point[1]))) ;
	
&lt;/pre&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Drop me a line with salary requirement and availability at lobrien@knowing.net
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=53d6677a-cad3-4a51-9703-975d13d9f9ea" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=e7888218-ce00-453e-990c-51984775687c</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,e7888218-ce00-453e-990c-51984775687c.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
I know that these little Zoho polls I'm running are totally unscientific, but they <i>are</i> interesting.
Only thirteen people have voted on the question <a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=e7888218-ce00-453e-990c-51984775687c&amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.knowing.net%2fPermaLink%2cguid%2c91a29f42-5c7b-4db6-a7fd-02cadd19590e.aspx">"Are
corporate SD managers too risk averse or too eager?"</a> but <i>every vote</i> has
been "too risk averse."
</p>
        <p>
I'm very surprised by that, because back when I actually did real surveys (at Software
Development and Computer Language magazines), managerial eagerness to embrace the
latest shiny new toy came across as a real problem. That it's not seen that way by
the first baker's dozen of self-selecting developers who happen to read my blog ...
well, I just don't know how to take it.
</p>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=e7888218-ce00-453e-990c-51984775687c" />
      </body>
      <title>Wow, are program managers really that conservative?</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,e7888218-ce00-453e-990c-51984775687c.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,e7888218-ce00-453e-990c-51984775687c.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 02:23:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
I know that these little Zoho polls I'm running are totally unscientific, but they &lt;i&gt;are&lt;/i&gt; interesting.
Only thirteen people have voted on the question &lt;a href="http://www.knowing.net/ct.ashx?id=e7888218-ce00-453e-990c-51984775687c&amp;amp;url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.knowing.net%2fPermaLink%2cguid%2c91a29f42-5c7b-4db6-a7fd-02cadd19590e.aspx"&gt;"Are
corporate SD managers too risk averse or too eager?"&lt;/a&gt; but &lt;i&gt;every vote&lt;/i&gt; has
been "too risk averse."
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
I'm very surprised by that, because back when I actually did real surveys (at Software
Development and Computer Language magazines), managerial eagerness to embrace the
latest shiny new toy came across as a real problem. That it's not seen that way by
the first baker's dozen of self-selecting developers who happen to read my blog ...
well, I just don't know how to take it.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=e7888218-ce00-453e-990c-51984775687c" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=e731098c-89b5-4b82-8d7b-14b64a319881</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,e731098c-89b5-4b82-8d7b-14b64a319881.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
Here's a fun one to make up for all the dry process questions I've been asking: What
rewards do you appreciate at software project completion? Money? Vacation? Time to
learn?
</p>
        <iframe frameborder="0" src="http://polls.zoho.com/external/lobrien/most-appreciated-rewards-at-software-project-completion" width="260" height="300">
        </iframe>
        <p>
(If you're reading in an aggregator, poll probably only visible if you jump to the
site)
</p>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=e731098c-89b5-4b82-8d7b-14b64a319881" />
      </body>
      <title>Most Appreciated Rewards at Software Project Completion?</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,e731098c-89b5-4b82-8d7b-14b64a319881.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,e731098c-89b5-4b82-8d7b-14b64a319881.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 01:08:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
Here's a fun one to make up for all the dry process questions I've been asking: What
rewards do you appreciate at software project completion? Money? Vacation? Time to
learn?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;iframe frameborder='0' src='http://polls.zoho.com/external/lobrien/most-appreciated-rewards-at-software-project-completion' width='260' height='300'&gt;
&lt;/iframe&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
(If you're reading in an aggregator, poll probably only visible if you jump to the
site)
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=e731098c-89b5-4b82-8d7b-14b64a319881" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.knowing.net/Trackback.aspx?guid=91a29f42-5c7b-4db6-a7fd-02cadd19590e</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://www.knowing.net/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,91a29f42-5c7b-4db6-a7fd-02cadd19590e.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Larry O'Brien</dc:creator>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
I've been pondering this series of polls I've been running and wrote the following
paragraph:
</p>
        <quote>
Standing in opposition for this need for high productivity is risk: risk of major
delay, risk of a show-stopping technical incompatibility, risk of embracing a tool
or technique that is reaching the end of its evolution. These types of risks can have
huge costs, and it’s very reasonable for project managers to decide to be conservative,
especially when it comes to critical infrastructure components. 
</quote>
        <p>
But then I was stuck. In the next paragraph I'd like to be a little more prescriptive.
But what do corporate program managers need to hear? Do they need to hear "Hey! Don't
go chasing after yet another shiny new toy!" or do they need to hear "Go for it! You
can take a little risk on the technology for a prototype or a one-off or an administrative
automation tool"?
</p>
        <p>
Of course, I'll try to make both points, but which should I emphasize?
</p>
        <p>
Give your answer in the following poll (which, if you're reading in an aggregator,
you probably can't see unless you follow it to my site):
</p>
        <iframe frameborder="0" src="http://polls.zoho.com/external/lobrien/are-corporate-sd-managers-too-risk-averse-or-too-eager" width="260" height="450">
        </iframe>
        <img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=91a29f42-5c7b-4db6-a7fd-02cadd19590e" />
      </body>
      <title>Are corporate program managers too risk-averse?</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,91a29f42-5c7b-4db6-a7fd-02cadd19590e.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,91a29f42-5c7b-4db6-a7fd-02cadd19590e.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 21:49:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
I've been pondering this series of polls I've been running and wrote the following
paragraph:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;quote&gt;
Standing in opposition for this need for high productivity is risk: risk of major
delay, risk of a show-stopping technical incompatibility, risk of embracing a tool
or technique that is reaching the end of its evolution. These types of risks can have
huge costs, and it’s very reasonable for project managers to decide to be conservative,
especially when it comes to critical infrastructure components. 
&lt;/quote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But then I was stuck. In the next paragraph I'd like to be a little more prescriptive.
But what do corporate program managers need to hear? Do they need to hear "Hey! Don't
go chasing after yet another shiny new toy!" or do they need to hear "Go for it! You
can take a little risk on the technology for a prototype or a one-off or an administrative
automation tool"?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Of course, I'll try to make both points, but which should I emphasize?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Give your answer in the following poll (which, if you're reading in an aggregator,
you probably can't see unless you follow it to my site):
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;iframe frameborder='0' src='http://polls.zoho.com/external/lobrien/are-corporate-sd-managers-too-risk-averse-or-too-eager' width='260' height='450'&gt;
&lt;/iframe&gt;
&lt;img width="0" height="0" src="http://www.knowing.net/aggbug.ashx?id=91a29f42-5c7b-4db6-a7fd-02cadd19590e" /&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>