jobs site

[R.Daugherty]

jobs site

Certainly everything you said is true, and yes in the name of Internet time and all that stuff there was a lot of half baked stuff thrown up on the net. Even if it was my product this is something that is in the realm of a glitch in the sense that the Back button did work in most browsers, and I appreciate the feedback, but it isn't my product. I will say that two people writing the whole thing from scratch in three months makes for three months on Internet time to be sure. But getting it right is all that counts, as you point out. I think there are some companies out there that have way more than six man months in their job site with no more features and performance than we do, and still have a glitch. I did forward your comments onward however, and I also suggested the backward button be at the bottom to replace the Back glyph. Hopefully it will help. Thanks, Ralph

[Guest.Visitor]

jobs site

Joe, you're a hard man. If the developer flags up a problem and he's ordered not to pursue it that's his manager's fault, not his own. I've had it happen to me. What are the choices? Swallow hard, or take your little grey cells elsewhere. Not always so practical with little mouths at home clamouring to be fed. :-) Dave...

[J.Pluta]

jobs site

I know, Dave. I've fought the good fight and lost, and had to pay the consequences. It's a LOT easier to say when you have another job to walk to. So in no way am I jumping on people who on a day to day basis are told to do their jobs a little more poorly for the sake of the bottom line. You're absolutely right thatit's Management that's at fault in that environment. Far be it for me to tell a Microserf that he should quit for moral principles. This isn't a perfect world.

But I also look at it this way: if you worked for Firestone and put out those defective tires, KNOWING they were defective, you've got a pretty heavy moral responsibilty, IMO. While obviously not so dramatic, there's still the hard truth that if a software firm's management decides that putting out crap software is acceptable and they get public buy-in to the concept, then in the long run, ALL programmers suffer. No longer is this a profession where the practitioners are afforded the benefits of a skilled laborer, it's simply fast food on a CD, and the pay, benefits, and most importantly the corporate loyalty all dwindle as a result.

Yeah, I'm hardheaded on this. But it's more towards the consultants and self-styled pundits, like me. Truly, I don't recommend that anyone in the position of feeding the family vs. "making a stand" should throw down their keyboards in protest and walk out. But people in Ralph's position who choose to make their voices heard in a public forum, should in my opinion be held accountable to a somewhat higher standard. This goes for yours truly.

Joe

"Dave Kahn" <David.Kahn@reckittbenckiser.com> wrote in message news:1df7d500.16@WebX.WawyahGHajS...

Joe, you're a hard man. If the developer flags up a problem and he's ordered not to pursue it that's his manager's fault, not his own. I've had it happen to me. What are the choices? Swallow hard, or take your little grey cells elsewhere. Not always so practical with little mouths at home clamouring to be fed. :-) Dave...

[Guest.Visitor]

jobs site

We all need the this kind of coaching from time to time, Joe. It certainly helps make me a better developer. I finally found the bug, after you pointed it out, andthink it could be fixed easily.

I ran into another problem today while testing JOBS400. I offer it to Ralphwith the desire to be helpful.

In Netscape 4.08:

Problem occurred in HSM processing

Server: JOBSITE: Requested opcode: SCHMORE: Replied opcode: *ERROR : Detail: Reply not generated for opcode SCHMORE:

This page may be the result of attempting to reach another page in this site using a Bookmark. This site does not support Bookmarks. Please use either the "APPLICANTS" or "EMPLOYERS" link on the left to reach the page that you want"

In IE 5.5:

Problem occurred in HSM processing

Server	:JOBSITE:
Requested opcode	:SEARCH:
Replied opcode	:*ERROR :
Detail	:SCH_DEV support server timed out.:

This page may be the result of attempting to reach another page in this site using a Bookmark. This site does not support Bookmarks. Please use either the "APPLICANTS" or "EMPLOYERS" link on the left to reach the page that you want"

Hope it helps. Nathan.

"Joe Pluta" <joepluta@plutabrothers.com> wrote in message news:5B07B02C6D8222977E459BB3867FED2...bX.WawyahGHajS...

I know, Dave. I've fought the good fight and lost, and had to pay the consequences. It's a LOT easier to say when you have another job to walk to. So in no way am I jumping on people who on a day to day basis are told to do their jobs a little more poorly for the sake of the bottom line. You're absolutely right thatit's Management that's at fault in that environment. Far be it for me to tell a Microserf that he should quit for moral principles. This isn't a perfect world.

But I also look at it this way: if you worked for Firestone and put out those defective tires, KNOWING they were defective, you've got a pretty heavy moral responsibilty, IMO. While obviously not so dramatic, there's still the hard truth that if a software firm's management decides that putting out crap software is acceptable and they get public buy-in to the concept, then in the long run, ALL programmers suffer. No longer is this a profession where the practitioners are afforded the benefits of a skilled laborer, it's simply fast food on a CD, and the pay, benefits, and most importantly the corporate loyalty all dwindle as a result.

Yeah, I'm hardheaded on this. But it's more towards the consultants and self-styled pundits, like me. Truly, I don't recommend that anyone in the position of feeding the family vs. "making a stand" should throw down their keyboards in protest and walk out. But people in Ralph's position who choose to make their voices heard in a public forum, should in my opinion be held accountable to a somewhat higher standard. This goes for yours truly.

Joe

"Dave Kahn" <David.Kahn@reckittbenckiser.com> wrote in message news:1df7d500.16@WebX.WawyahGHajS...

Joe, you're a hard man. If the developer flags up a problem and he's ordered not to pursue it that's his manager's fault, not his own. I've had it happen to me. What are the choices? Swallow hard, or take your little grey cells elsewhere. Not always so practical with little mouths at home clamouring to be fed. :-) Dave...

[R.Daugherty]

jobs site

Nathan, it looks to me like the Search server program became unavailable for some reason. It has nothing to do with Back, security, page expirations, etc. despite the all purpose "doesn't support bookmarks" statement at the bottom. I comment on this, as we all are, with the hope of learning something about the general principles of AS/400 web server design and programming that we can apply to our future endeavors whatever the product, language, and user interface mix. We have certainly had interesting discussions so far and perhaps this will add some flavor to it. Ralph

[Guest.Visitor]

jobs site

But I also look at it this way: if you worked for Firestone and put out those defective tires, KNOWING they were defective, you've got a pretty heavy moral responsibility, IMO

Without question. But is the comparison valid? The difference between a defective tyre and a defective back button is qualitative, not just one of degree. The back button problem would be more akin to being aware that the white paint used to pick out the maker's name flakes off after a couple of thousand miles. The product is defective but in no way dangerous to the consumer. On the other hand if you are working on a system that's supposed to show the latest stock prices and there is a glitch that might prompt someone to make the wrong investment decision then you have a valid comparison with the Firestone situation.

No longer is this a profession where the practitioners are afforded the benefits of a skilled laborer, it's simply fast food on a CD, and the pay, benefits, and most importantly the corporate loyalty all dwindle as a result.

In the UK the government is deliberately promoting this trend. Firstly by changing the tax regime (the notorious IR35) in an attempt to drive freelancers like myself out of business; and secondly by lowering the immigration barriers and actively recruiting people with computer skills from third world countries. These moves are calculated to provide a cheap pool of computer labour. Unfortunately this will make taking a stand on the quality of our output more difficult than ever. Dave...

[J.Pluta]

jobs site

You know, I pre-answered this question when I made the statement. I also pointed out the real issue: "While obviously not so dramatic, there's still the hard truth that if a software firm's management decides that putting out crap software is acceptable and they get public buy-in to the concept, then in the long run, ALL programmers suffer."

While I understand your concept that bad software is not as bad as bad tires, I disagree that bad software is "in no way dangerous to the consumer". Bad software reduces productivity, raises stress, and in general wreaks havoc with a person's day-to-day life. The more we count on software on a daily basis, the more we need it to be safe. Instead, we see no limit of disclaimers on software, ranging from the "if you use this and it ruins your business, tough luck" stuff from Microsoft to the "never use this software in any way that could endanger human life" disclaimers from Sun.

I keep turning back to the day when, if a customer pointed out a bug, we fixed it, as opposed to saying, "Oh well, no REAL damage, just reboot your PC." Well, if a bride-to-be saved a wedding list that she had meticulously keyed in from a tattered hardcopy (found in the groom-to-be's jeans after he washed them), then went back in a couple of days later (after the groom-to-be had tossed out same tattered hardcopy, thinking it no longer necessary) and found that the document had been corrupted, well, that's in no way DANGEROUS to the consumer, although the groom-to-be might argue with you. My point is that the attitude that our bugs aren't "dangerous" is in itself dangerous - to US as programmers. If my boss tells me to ship bad software, that's one thing, but if I ship it because it isn't "dangerous", then I'm contributing to the overall denigration of our profession.

Joe

"Dave Kahn" <David.Kahn@reckittbenckiser.com> wrote in message news:1df7d500.20@WebX.WawyahGHajS...

> But I also look at it this way: if you worked for Firestone and put > out those defective tires, KNOWING they were defective, you've got > a pretty heavy moral responsibility, IMO Without question. But is the comparison valid? The difference between a defective tyre and a defective back button is qualitative, not just one of degree. The back button problem would be more akin to being aware that the white paint used to pick out the maker's name flakes off after a couple of thousand miles. The product is defective but in no way dangerous to the consumer.

[Guest.Visitor]

jobs site

While I understand your concept that bad software is not as bad as bad tires, I disagree that bad software is "in no way dangerous to the consumer".

Hey, I never said that. What I said was that there is a qualitative difference between software defects that cause inconvenience to the user and those that cause actual damage. A software defect could easily be more serious than a defective tyre, for example in the control system of a driverless train or a fly-by-wire aircraft.

Instead, we see no limit of disclaimers on software, ranging from the "if you use this and it ruins your business, tough luck" stuff from Microsoft to the "never use this software in any way that could endanger human life" disclaimers from Sun.

The disclaimers aren't there because the manufacturers know their software is bad (even if they do know that) but because of the highly litigious nature of American society. They have to be there in case a customer sues because the company didn't warn him there might be a bug. It's like the disclaimer on a packet of peanuts warning that the bag contains nuts. Your example of the lost wedding list is qualitatively the same as the defective tyre. In both cases the customer is harmed. The difference is one of degree. It's not comparable with an iffy back arrow even though the user may be inconvenienced.

If my boss tells me to ship bad software, that's one thing, but if I ship it because it isn't "dangerous", then I'm contributing to the overall denigration of our profession.

True, but if you ship it knowing it's in any way defective you're also contributing to that effect. However, you may be forced to join the downward spiral. There comes a point when you have to get your software out the door whether you want to or not, otherwise your competitors will beat you to the market and have a cheaper product. The fact that yours is better will not save it. Sad but true. Dave...

[J.Pluta]

jobs site

We just have to agree to disagree here. While I understand your sentiment, I don't agree with it. To me, ittypifies the "Microsoft mentality" which, in my opinion, has set our industry back at least a decade. The concept of "ship it no matter what" is, in my opinion, indefensible. If your object is solely to make money, then you have different goals than I do. I believe in designing software with reasonable deadlines and realistic target dates, with testing and quality assurance budgeted both time and dollarwise, in order to put out a good product. If I personally can't reach those goals, then it's clear that I incorrectly budgeted the project. Shipping it anyway, despite "inconveniences", in order to make money, is what I refer to as shipping fast food on a CD. In my opinion, that's the attitude that has already eroded consumer confidence in software and endangers the truly superior products such as the AS/400.

There is never, in my mind, a good reason for shipping bad code.I refuse to "join the downward spiral". But that's my personal philosophy, and one not everybody agrees with, obviously.

Joe

Your example of the lost wedding list is qualitatively the same as the defective tyre. In both cases the customer is harmed. The difference is one of degree. It's not comparable with an iffy back arrow even though the user may be inconvenienced. > If my boss tells me to ship bad software, that's one thing, but if > I ship it because it isn't "dangerous", then I'm contributing to > the overall denigration of our profession. True, but if you ship it knowing it's in any way defective you're also contributing to that effect. However, you may be forced to join the downward spiral. There comes a point when you have to get your software out the door whether you want to or not, otherwise your competitors will beat you to the market and have a cheaper product. The fact that yours is better will not save it. Sad but true.

[J.Pluta]

jobs site

Dave, I just wanted to say that I realize I'm coming off a little heavy handed, and I don't mean to. I guess it's just that there's something about the state of the industry today that bothers me. It may be because of how I got into the field. I sort of fell into it as a kid, and I just became enamored with the whole endeavor. While I realized that what we're doing, in the most essential analysis, is simply reading in data and spitting it back out, somewhere along the line I saw that there was something unique about the whole process. I mean, don't you ever have that feeling, that "Ah HAH!" sense when you see the right way of doing things? That's an act of creating something, something that never existed. Yeah, it's a utilitarian job, but somewhere in there is the ability to snatch these little bubbles of thought out of the air and make them real. The sense of wonder that comes to me when the light goes on and I truly SEE the correct answer to a problem is just so gratifying; I have to liken it to a chef creating a dish or a musician when he selects just the right chord. And it's even better than that, because I'm truly creating something out of nothing, I'm giving substance to my very thoughts and ideas. At those times, programming is more like a craft or even an art than simply a job.

And that's what the idea of shipping software to make money steals from me. I take it personally, and I shouldn't. Lots of people, good, hard-working, honest people have to make sacrifices every day in every field in order to make ends meet. The fact that they may have to cut a corner or leave a loose end because the pressures of workaday living demand it shouldn't be a reason for me to go off on a rant. But there's something inside me that mourns what seems to me to be the the loss of this most wonderful of creative outlets.

In the olden days, an expert silversmith didn't worry about beating his neighbor to market. He made his own unique creations, and trusted that his expertise and craftsmanship would be sufficient to convince enough people to purchase his wares. He didn't worry about getting rich, he wanted enough money to pay his bills and practice his craft. But eventually, mass production and the 90-day stock cycle took over, and the idea of pumping out things as cheaply as the market would bear became the new standard, and the craftsman eventually died out, along with his craft.

Perhaps that's where our industry stands today. Perhaps we're at a cusp where the software craftsman is no longer a viable entity. Perhaps "good enough" is indeed good enough, and my silly idealism is no longer appropriate. Perhaps my anger is not towards you or even Microsoft, but instead against that most inexorable of enemies, Progress. Perhaps, indeed, I am an anachronism, and my ideas belong in the same dustbin as handcrafted automobiles.

I don't know for sure. I'd like to think that I can continue making a living keeping true to my own personal philosophy of trying to sell only the very best software and trying to teach only the very best techniques. But if not, that's no reason to come off all holier than thou to people who are trying to make a living. Please accept my apologies if I've offended.

Joe

[R.Daugherty]

jobs site

Joe, the talk sort of got directed in the direction of releasing software prematurely with insufficient testing, quality, etc. As for the project originally under discussion, there was a gap between us finishing it and it going live. There was no rush. The issue was a web page design issue that was misunderstood because it worked in most browsers at the time we tested. It just simply is not a ship something, anything, issue at all. I agree I need to be held to a higher standard because I also demand high standards from vendors such as IBM, but this is not a case of rushing a product to market to beat anything. We wanted it to be right, and perfect, and in fact now that the situation is better understood the web page design will probably be tweaked. I say this only because you describe something not being quite right and being shrugged off in lieu of a rush to market. That's not the case at all. There was some delay between finishing our testing and putting it into production, and if it was well understood that a change needed to be made it would have been made. Blame me for the issue not being well understood or whatever, but the portrait you paint of shoddy standards is exactly the opposite of the effort that went into this product. Just to set your mind at ease.... Ralph

[Guest.Visitor]

jobs site

For what it's worth, Joe, I'll relate a bit of my experience. When I was in college, the Japanese were killing the Americans in automobile quality. The result of which reflected in their increasing market share. Soon after that, I received an indirect benefit. My employer undertook a program whereby every employee (about 5,000people)in the plant received special training pertaining to the management of quality. I didn't work for Ford, but the enduringslogan "Quality is Job One" was a result of the same program. The intent was to completely change the culture of the company. It changed me.

My bachelors degree is in Business Management, and my initial career interests lied with Administration. But I switched to Software Development after seeing my peers mismanage software projects which resulted in extra large costs to the plant. I later took my ideas about quality to another employer which Ibelievecontributed to making him a rich man. I left him because he was dishonest in his dealings - a master ofmanipulation. He consistently over promised his customers, while he constrained his employees in the delivery of quality work.

So here I am, trying to make a living as a quality craftsman. I have had that "Ah HAH" feeling you spoke of. It's what keeps me motivated. I have to believe there's a place for it in this "industrialized"society.

Thanks for your comments.

Nathan.

"Joe Pluta" <joepluta@plutabrothers.com> wrote in message news:98D5B664511433457B83A19C412D933...bX.WawyahGHajS...

Dave, I just wanted to say that I realize I'm coming off a little heavy handed, and I don't mean to. I guess it's just that there's something about the state of the industry today that bothers me. It may be because of how I got into the field. I sort of fell into it as a kid, and I just became enamored with the whole endeavor. While I realized that what we're doing, in the most essential analysis, is simply reading in data and spitting it back out, somewhere along the line I saw that there was something unique about the whole process. I mean, don't you ever have that feeling, that "Ah HAH!" sense when you see the right way of doing things? That's an act of creating something, something that never existed. Yeah, it's a utilitarian job, but somewhere in there is the ability to snatch these little bubbles of thought out of the air and make them real. The sense of wonder that comes to me when the light goes on and I truly SEE the correct answer to a problem is just so gratifying; I have to liken it to a chef creating a dish or a musician when he selects just the right chord. And it's even better than that, because I'm truly creating something out of nothing, I'm giving substance to my very thoughts and ideas. At those times, programming is more like a craft or even an art than simply a job.

And that's what the idea of shipping software to make money steals from me. I take it personally, and I shouldn't. Lots of people, good, hard-working, honest people have to make sacrifices every day in every field in order to make ends meet. The fact that they may have to cut a corner or leave a loose end because the pressures of workaday living demand it shouldn't be a reason for me to go off on a rant. But there's something inside me that mourns what seems to me to be the the loss of this most wonderful of creative outlets.

In the olden days, an expert silversmith didn't worry about beating his neighbor to market. He made his own unique creations, and trusted that his expertise and craftsmanship would be sufficient to convince enough people to purchase his wares. He didn't worry about getting rich, he wanted enough money to pay his bills and practice his craft. But eventually, mass production and the 90-day stock cycle took over, and the idea of pumping out things as cheaply as the market would bear became the new standard, and the craftsman eventually died out, along with his craft.

Perhaps that's where our industry stands today. Perhaps we're at a cusp where the software craftsman is no longer a viable entity. Perhaps "good enough" is indeed good enough, and my silly idealism is no longer appropriate. Perhaps my anger is not towards you or even Microsoft, but instead against that most inexorable of enemies, Progress. Perhaps, indeed, I am an anachronism, and my ideas belong in the same dustbin as handcrafted automobiles.

I don't know for sure. I'd like to think that I can continue making a living keeping true to my own personal philosophy of trying to sell only the very best software and trying to teach only the very best techniques. But if not, that's no reason to come off all holier than thou to people who are trying to make a living. Please accept my apologies if I've offended.

Joe

[Guest.Visitor]

jobs site

Joe, I think we agree on just about everything. I too abhor shoddy work. Programming is a craft and it is creative. It's also great gymnastics for the mind, as though someone were paying me to sit and crack crossword puzzles all day. I came to it somewhat later than you, not beginning until after my bachelor's degree. As a graduate I firmly believed that I had just spent 3 years at university being trained to think. It was only when the computer with its remorseless literalism wouldn't do quite what I wanted that I discovered just how unclear my thought processes were. There's nothing like programming for really teaching you to think rigorously. I'm sure there's still room for the master programmer to practise his craft but he's becoming an increasing rarity. I'm not saying that's how I'd like things to be, it's just the way they are. :-( Dave...

[David Abramowitz]

jobs site

Joe Pluta wrote: . If your object is solely to make money, then you have different goals than I do. Wait until you have kids :-) Dave

[J.Pluta]

jobs site

Have two, and a granddaughter, Dave. >grin<

"David Abramowitz" <105445.2515@compuserve.com> wrote in message news:1df7d500.28@WebX.WawyahGHajS...

Joe Pluta wrote: . If your object is solely to make money, then you have different goals than I do. Wait until you have kids :-) Dave