Quantcast

Are Objects really hard?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
91 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Stéphane Ducasse

On Feb 14, 2012, at 1:40 PM, Marcus Denker wrote:

> Improving a system allows you do do things *faster*, and even, at some point,
> do things that where impossible without the improvement. (regardless how
> much time and intelligence you have).
>
> *That* is non-linear progress.

YES.
This is why we are investigating in the infrastructure. Because we want to be able to
do impossible things: like serializing a stack with fuel and loading it in another image :).

Stef


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Hernan Wilkinson-3
In reply to this post by Guido Stepken
Well... this is an example of what the "thread" was about at the beginning... that is, the lack of knowledge on software development... I you have known a little bit about architecture, multi-threading and vm implementation, you would quickly realize that pharo will not scale as a server. Squeak (where pharo comes from) was not design/implemented to be used as a server (and please, don not take this bad, I don't want to be unworthy with Pharo because it is changing and getting better with every realease)

So, if you want to do a "serious enterprise" application, you should have used and architecture prepare for that such as GemStone (GLASS in this case)... it is a pity you lost so much money due to you "lack" of knowledge.

Bye,
Hernan

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Guido Stepken <[hidden email]> wrote:

Am 13.02.2012 20:25 schrieb "Stéphane Ducasse" <[hidden email][hidden email][hidden email]>:
>
> Dear Guido

Hi Stef!

> > Do the right things, make Pharo, Seaside *usable*
>
> Did you try with VisualWorks?
> I'm pretty sure that you can use it without paying a license. :)

>
> > Look at: http://www.cyberport.de/notebook-und-tablet/notebook-berater/erweiterte-suche/liste.html
> >
> > Selecting notebooks by price, endurance, weight, with sliders. I could sell *hundreds* of those shops to customers, big companies, hosting inclusive for 20.000 each.
>
> Are you doing such web site? With Seaside? With Pharo?

Wie started off a project, a shop like this, with Seaside on Pharo, and we had to give up, when benchmarks came into consideration.

You remember, some time ago, you and Marcus denied all my complaints:

http://forum.world.st/Hanging-connects-exhausted-resources-memory-leaks-bocked-everything-Unusable-td3669616.html

What has happened? I went on with pushing development of a similar shop (see cyberport.de) and finally lost several 10.000nds of €, because Pharo/Seaside *is* much too slow for any serious enterprise.

> > Pharo/Seaside *is* the right tool if YOU WOULD DO THE RIGHT THINGS, not just bothering some class structure deep in Pharo.
> >
> > Pharo hangs even at *directly* serving static pages at low loads. I hoped to see significant speedups due to lack of any 3/4/5 tier middleware with being everything done within one VM. Database, delivery, …
>
> Provide real code and examples.

My former complaints (see link above) have been ignored, calling me a Troll, and in the meantime this list *is full* of reports Pharo being unstable.

You as being the *always optimistic* chief develloper and project manager your lazy attitude already has cost me a lot of €!!! More than your annual income!

But ok, my personal risk!

> > I am still disappointed. Welcome in the *real world*. Doing academic brainfuck is not sufficient.
>
> :)
> Who are you to know what we are really doing :)

I follow all changes, i know, hat you are aiming at! But - you've got the wrong priorities!

Stability *always* comes first!!!

> > So are your etats for developing Pharo, near ZERO. Start thinking like business men! Listen to that, what customers want!
>
>
> I would be curious to see your "clients".

I've got best connections to top 500 enterprise and deciders in germany. I would be pleased to present them a Seaside Shop, running on Pharo, PostgreSql or Magma behind, ready to run from within one image.

> Pharo is far from what we dream about but we are serious about it and we are concerned by business.
>
> Now your trolling is good because we are not an obscure community without a troll but we have one troll
> so this is good. Thanks.

Ok. If you are not able to get Pharo development managed under consideration of business needs, means: benchmarks and stress tests equiv to sunit tests, please step back as project leader!

> If you are positive and provide information that is not just bullshitting then we will consider to reply and consider your request else *plonk*

I am positive, still, although you cost me much money.

Happy hacking!

Guido Stepken




--
Hernán Wilkinson
Agile Software Development, Teaching & Coaching
Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207
email: [hidden email]
site: http://www.10Pines.com
Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Igor Stasenko
On 14 February 2012 15:07, Hernan Wilkinson
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Well... this is an example of what the "thread" was about at the
> beginning... that is, the lack of knowledge on software development... I you
> have known a little bit about architecture, multi-threading and vm
> implementation, you would quickly realize that pharo will not scale as a
> server. Squeak (where pharo comes from) was not design/implemented to be
> used as a server (and please, don not take this bad, I don't want to
> be unworthy with Pharo because it is changing and getting better with every
> realease)
>

There's no reason to take it bad, because you stating the truth.

> So, if you want to do a "serious enterprise" application, you should have
> used and architecture prepare for that such as GemStone (GLASS in this
> case)... it is a pity you lost so much money due to you "lack" of knowledge.
>

People who taking it serious also first discover the area of possibility,
which implies talking to people and asking questions.

I never seen from Guido questions like "does it scales if i run it
standalone etc".
And that means that he's not any serious with his harsh statements,
just trolling.

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Guido Stepken
Am 14.02.2012 16:57, schrieb Igor Stasenko:

> On 14 February 2012 15:07, Hernan Wilkinson
> <[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> Well... this is an example of what the "thread" was about at the
>> beginning... that is, the lack of knowledge on software development... I you
>> have known a little bit about architecture, multi-threading and vm
>> implementation, you would quickly realize that pharo will not scale as a
>> server. Squeak (where pharo comes from) was not design/implemented to be
>> used as a server (and please, don not take this bad, I don't want to
>> be unworthy with Pharo because it is changing and getting better with every
>> realease)
>>
> There's no reason to take it bad, because you stating the truth.
>
>> So, if you want to do a "serious enterprise" application, you should have
>> used and architecture prepare for that such as GemStone (GLASS in this
>> case)... it is a pity you lost so much money due to you "lack" of knowledge.
>>
> People who taking it serious also first discover the area of possibility,
> which implies talking to people and asking questions.
>
> I never seen from Guido questions like "does it scales if i run it
> standalone etc".
> And that means that he's not any serious with his harsh statements,
> just trolling.
>

Lookup Google "Pharo hanging" ... very few companies are really using
Pharo, but i am not the only one reporting this.

Tnx for the "troll".

Have fun hacking, Guido Stepken

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Igor Stasenko
On 14 February 2012 17:07, Guido Stepken <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Am 14.02.2012 16:57, schrieb Igor Stasenko:
>
>> On 14 February 2012 15:07, Hernan Wilkinson
>> <[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Well... this is an example of what the "thread" was about at the
>>> beginning... that is, the lack of knowledge on software development... I
>>> you
>>> have known a little bit about architecture, multi-threading and vm
>>> implementation, you would quickly realize that pharo will not scale as a
>>> server. Squeak (where pharo comes from) was not design/implemented to be
>>> used as a server (and please, don not take this bad, I don't want to
>>> be unworthy with Pharo because it is changing and getting better with
>>> every
>>> realease)
>>>
>> There's no reason to take it bad, because you stating the truth.
>>
>>> So, if you want to do a "serious enterprise" application, you should have
>>> used and architecture prepare for that such as GemStone (GLASS in this
>>> case)... it is a pity you lost so much money due to you "lack" of
>>> knowledge.
>>>
>> People who taking it serious also first discover the area of possibility,
>> which implies talking to people and asking questions.
>>
>> I never seen from Guido questions like "does it scales if i run it
>> standalone etc".
>> And that means that he's not any serious with his harsh statements,
>> just trolling.
>>
>
> Lookup Google "Pharo hanging" ... very few companies are really using Pharo,
> but i am not the only one reporting this.
>
Look for "rails hanging"  - ~ 11 million hits
Look for "C# hanging" ,  java hanging etc

now if this is the only criteria, on which you basing your choice,
then i feel sorry for you, because you cannot use any software made in
this world.

so, have fun hacking.

> Tnx for the "troll".
>
> Have fun hacking, Guido Stepken
>



--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard?

Larry Kellogg
In reply to this post by Hernan Wilkinson-3

Do you recall a talk Alan gave some years back at Stanford?  He was on a good rant about how our computer science/engineering departments had let themselves be turned into Java certification mills, and ultimately uttered the words "what has happened to the mighty Standford?"  I was a little surprised at his candor (took guts) and agreed with every word he said.



Here is a reference to an interview Alan did with ACM where he mentions Java vocational training: http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1039523 
"

AK Yes, that was the big revelation to me when I was in graduate school—when I finally understood that the half page of code on the bottom of page 13 of the Lisp 1.5 manual was Lisp in itself. These were “Maxwell’s Equations of Software!” This is the whole world of programming in a few lines that I can put my hand over.

I realized that anytime I want to know what I’m doing, I can just write down the kernel of this thing in a half page and it’s not going to lose any power. In fact, it’s going to gain power by being able to reenter itself much more readily than most systems done the other way can possibly do.

All of these ideas could be part of both software engineering and computer science, but I fear—as far as I can tell—that most undergraduate degrees in computer science these days are basically Java vocational training.

I’ve heard complaints from even mighty Stanford University with its illustrious faculty that basically the undergraduate computer science program is little more than Java certification.

"

  I think goodness that my first computer science professor tore two pages out of the LISP manual and drummed it into our thick skulls that the whole execution cycle was contained in APPLY  and EVAL. I owe that guy a lot. Thanks, Eddie Storm.

  Larry
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Guido Stepken
In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko
Hi Igor!

This is not the point. Modern architectures have different goals in mind. Projected on Pharo, it means that:

1. Make Pharo nonblocking. Remove any locking, completely.
2. Make Pharo fast. Use "in situ algorithms", avoid any copying of data, objects, whatever.
3. Make Pharo "overload proof". Install selfprotecting algorithms.
4. Read Knuth, use advanced algothims. Modern architectures dont't need to GC (or rarely). "Objects not created do not to be garbage collected!"
5. Make any GC concurrent for no longer intererrupting the VM.
6. Make Pharo multithreaded. Even my mobile has 2 processors, ASUS prime tablet even has 5!
7. Drop COGVM. LVCC is able to post - jit, callback problem solved, MP-ready, e.t.c.
8. UNIT Testing is not enough. Continuous benchmarking and stress/overload tests belong to *every* serious software development process.
9. You develop on MacOS. Where in the world are webhosters using MacOS? Make it work stable on FreeBSD, Linux, Windows Server 2008 ...
10. Use Moose...whatever to detect possible deadlocks. This belongs to modern software development.
11. Offer a collaboration tool on Pharo, where Smalltalk hobbyists may help you refactoring ... a todo list ..
12. Same for translations.
13. Long time ago i posted a bug: "Wrong development process". Stef deleted my entry without understanding.

tnx 4 understanding, Guido Stepken 


2012/2/14 Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]>
On 14 February 2012 17:07, Guido Stepken <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Am 14.02.2012 16:57, schrieb Igor Stasenko:
>
>> On 14 February 2012 15:07, Hernan Wilkinson
>> <[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Well... this is an example of what the "thread" was about at the
>>> beginning... that is, the lack of knowledge on software development... I
>>> you
>>> have known a little bit about architecture, multi-threading and vm
>>> implementation, you would quickly realize that pharo will not scale as a
>>> server. Squeak (where pharo comes from) was not design/implemented to be
>>> used as a server (and please, don not take this bad, I don't want to
>>> be unworthy with Pharo because it is changing and getting better with
>>> every
>>> realease)
>>>
>> There's no reason to take it bad, because you stating the truth.
>>
>>> So, if you want to do a "serious enterprise" application, you should have
>>> used and architecture prepare for that such as GemStone (GLASS in this
>>> case)... it is a pity you lost so much money due to you "lack" of
>>> knowledge.
>>>
>> People who taking it serious also first discover the area of possibility,
>> which implies talking to people and asking questions.
>>
>> I never seen from Guido questions like "does it scales if i run it
>> standalone etc".
>> And that means that he's not any serious with his harsh statements,
>> just trolling.
>>
>
> Lookup Google "Pharo hanging" ... very few companies are really using Pharo,
> but i am not the only one reporting this.
>
Look for "rails hanging"  - ~ 11 million hits
Look for "C# hanging" ,  java hanging etc

now if this is the only criteria, on which you basing your choice,
then i feel sorry for you, because you cannot use any software made in
this world.

so, have fun hacking.

> Tnx for the "troll".
>
> Have fun hacking, Guido Stepken
>



--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard?

Gary Chambers-4
In reply to this post by Larry Kellogg
Thankfully I did Smalltalk (V/DOS) at university, not looked back since...

Regards, Gary
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard?


Do you recall a talk Alan gave some years back at Stanford?  He was on a good rant about how our computer science/engineering departments had let themselves be turned into Java certification mills, and ultimately uttered the words "what has happened to the mighty Standford?"  I was a little surprised at his candor (took guts) and agreed with every word he said.



Here is a reference to an interview Alan did with ACM where he mentions Java vocational training: http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1039523 
"

AK Yes, that was the big revelation to me when I was in graduate school—when I finally understood that the half page of code on the bottom of page 13 of the Lisp 1.5 manual was Lisp in itself. These were “Maxwell’s Equations of Software!” This is the whole world of programming in a few lines that I can put my hand over.

I realized that anytime I want to know what I’m doing, I can just write down the kernel of this thing in a half page and it’s not going to lose any power. In fact, it’s going to gain power by being able to reenter itself much more readily than most systems done the other way can possibly do.

All of these ideas could be part of both software engineering and computer science, but I fear—as far as I can tell—that most undergraduate degrees in computer science these days are basically Java vocational training.

I’ve heard complaints from even mighty Stanford University with its illustrious faculty that basically the undergraduate computer science program is little more than Java certification.

"

  I think goodness that my first computer science professor tore two pages out of the LISP manual and drummed it into our thick skulls that the whole execution cycle was contained in APPLY  and EVAL. I owe that guy a lot. Thanks, Eddie Storm.

  Larry
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Igor Stasenko
In reply to this post by Guido Stepken
On 14 February 2012 18:17, Guido Stepken <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Igor!
>
> This is not the point. Modern architectures have different goals in mind.
> Projected on Pharo, it means that:
>
> 1. Make Pharo nonblocking. Remove any locking, completely.
> 2. Make Pharo fast. Use "in situ algorithms", avoid any copying of data,
> objects, whatever.
> 3. Make Pharo "overload proof". Install selfprotecting algorithms.
> 4. Read Knuth, use advanced algothims. Modern architectures dont't need to
> GC (or rarely). "Objects not created do not to be garbage collected!"
> 5. Make any GC concurrent for no longer intererrupting the VM.
> 6. Make Pharo multithreaded. Even my mobile has 2 processors, ASUS prime
> tablet even has 5!
> 7. Drop COGVM. LVCC is able to post - jit, callback problem solved,
> MP-ready, e.t.c.
> 8. UNIT Testing is not enough. Continuous benchmarking and stress/overload
> tests belong to *every* serious software development process.
> 9. You develop on MacOS. Where in the world are webhosters using MacOS? Make
> it work stable on FreeBSD, Linux, Windows Server 2008 ...
> 10. Use Moose...whatever to detect possible deadlocks. This belongs to
> modern software development.
> 11. Offer a collaboration tool on Pharo, where Smalltalk hobbyists may help
> you refactoring ... a todo list ..
> 12. Same for translations.
> 13. Long time ago i posted a bug: "Wrong development process". Stef deleted
> my entry without understanding.
>

Thanks. It was for a big revelation for me.  Now i know what to do.  :)

Now seriously, do you really think that people here are not considered
all of things you listed,
and not trying to improve things in those directions?

Also, do you have any idea how many man-hours it may require to
implement all items in your list?
And even if you can estimate it, do you have any idea where to find
such massive amount of human resource for such activities? And most of
all, are those people will work for free, based on their enthusiasm,
or well paid?

Because if you pay to people, then you having full right to demand
things to be done right and
in right term. But if you don't, then just please shut up and stop
bashing people who doing everything
for free, so you can use it paying NOTHING.

So, next time you will say that you lost a bunch of money because of
Pharo, i'd like to also see an attached figures the amount of money
you invested into Pharo project.

> tnx 4 understanding, Guido Stepken
>



--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Guido Stepken
2012/2/14 Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]>


Now seriously, do you really think that people here are not considered
all of things you listed,
and not trying to improve things in those directions?

Don't see benchmarks anywhere on Pharo Homepage, even the 1.3 Image was not up to date for long time. Nobody really cared.

Stef as project leader missed to set up "daily todo list", list of dutys for the developers, payed or unpayed, doesn't play any role!

Choosing the *right* development process decides over the quality an speed of a product, free or unfree.
 
Also, do you have any idea how many man-hours it may require to
implement all items in your list?

Yes, 4-5 manyears? So, why reinventing the wheel, like with COGVM? LLVM ist much better supported by big, big, commercial companies.
 
And even if you can estimate it, do you have any idea where to find
such massive amount of human resource for such activities?

I wish, you would lean the profession of fundraising for Pharo. Set up an auction homepage, file out code to be refactored, or to be programmed, with call for bids, name the price, collect money. And you will see, there are thousands of Smalltalkers outside being a still reserve ... solving Pharo problems for a few bucks, mostly located in Asia, Russia, India.

In India a Smalltalk developer is about 600$/Month. Fully qualified.
 
And most of
all, are those people will work for free, based on their enthusiasm,
or well paid?

See above, wrong development process.
 

Because if you pay to people, then you having full right to demand
things to be done right and
in right term. But if you don't, then just please shut up and stop
bashing people who doing everything
for free, so you can use it paying NOTHING.

I am not bashing. You all don't understand how to set up successful projects.
 

So, next time you will say that you lost a bunch of money because of
Pharo, i'd like to also see an attached figures the amount of money
you invested into Pharo project.

 
Where is the list of sponsors for your Pharo projekt on the homepage? Private, Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum? The topten list of committers?

Have fun, Guido Stepken
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Igor Stasenko
On 14 February 2012 19:36, Guido Stepken <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2012/2/14 Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]>
>>
>>
>>
>> Now seriously, do you really think that people here are not considered
>> all of things you listed,
>> and not trying to improve things in those directions?
>
>
> Don't see benchmarks anywhere on Pharo Homepage, even the 1.3 Image was not
> up to date for long time. Nobody really cared.
>
> Stef as project leader missed to set up "daily todo list", list of dutys for
> the developers, payed or unpayed, doesn't play any role!
>
> Choosing the *right* development process decides over the quality an speed
> of a product, free or unfree.
>
>>
>> Also, do you have any idea how many man-hours it may require to
>> implement all items in your list?
>
>
> Yes, 4-5 manyears? So, why reinventing the wheel, like with COGVM? LLVM ist
> much better supported by big, big, commercial companies.
>
>>
>> And even if you can estimate it, do you have any idea where to find
>> such massive amount of human resource for such activities?
>
>
> I wish, you would lean the profession of fundraising for Pharo. Set up an
> auction homepage, file out code to be refactored, or to be programmed, with
> call for bids, name the price, collect money. And you will see, there are
> thousands of Smalltalkers outside being a still reserve ... solving Pharo
> problems for a few bucks, mostly located in Asia, Russia, India.
>
> In India a Smalltalk developer is about 600$/Month. Fully qualified.
>
>>
>> And most of
>> all, are those people will work for free, based on their enthusiasm,
>> or well paid?
>
>
> See above, wrong development process.
>
>>
>>
>> Because if you pay to people, then you having full right to demand
>> things to be done right and
>> in right term. But if you don't, then just please shut up and stop
>> bashing people who doing everything
>> for free, so you can use it paying NOTHING.
>
>
> I am not bashing. You all don't understand how to set up successful
> projects.
>

Reading your comments, i now have only single question left:
if you know things so well, why you just don't organize own project,
set things up as you know right,
make auctions/hire indians/martians/whatever is best for you to meet
the objectives you have in mind?
Why relying on stupid people who don't want to listen and seemingly
don't understand what/how things should run, when you can do it by
yourself?
Like the idea? Now get lost and start making it real.

>>
>>
>> So, next time you will say that you lost a bunch of money because of
>> Pharo, i'd like to also see an attached figures the amount of money
>> you invested into Pharo project.
>>
>
> Where is the list of sponsors for your Pharo projekt on the homepage?
> Private, Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum? The topten list of committers?
>
> Have fun, Guido Stepken



--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Guido Stepken
Get the development process developed! 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Andreas Wacknitz

Am 14.02.2012 um 20:01 schrieb Guido Stepken:

> Get the development process developed!
>
Guido, you seem to have interest in Pharo, even if it doesn't fit your needs today.
You also seem to have "the right" connections and money. What about turning this into something positive
for you, your customers and the whole community?
Make a list of things you want to have. Make the things more concrete than in your last posts. An wave with a bundle of money.
You will maybe raise the interest of some of the brilliant guys here and can convince them to do what you want. From what you
wrote within this thread I would bet that you will be able to offer more than $100,000 -  a very convincing argument and maybe enough
to get what you want from Pharo!


Regards,
Andreas




smime.p7s (6K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

S Krish
Over the past three years, I have learnt that the one biggest skill all of us have to develop is to see and gain from the positive side of everything and everyone.

The quick poring through this chain, makes me feel there is lot we can gain from the most blunt critics, unjust as it might feel. The most important is to be able to make even a fiercest critic welcome to the community. 

At the core, the whole point that is being vociferously pushed for is the need to be "business" oriented, which I am sure Guido too appreciates is not a small step and that no two people necessarily agree on a perfectly aligned path to reach there.

Like Steve led Apple to its heights, we should wish Guido to lead his endeavor to success, even if it has to be any other technology stack and keep contributing more concrete facts for Pharo to take the lead from.

To agree to disagree, but push forward to get Pharo over to its ultimate goal is eventually in the hands of the Pharo Community and each has his own role to play ranging from the eternal optimist and the ones not so...

Understanding the facts is also important beyond technical content of a programming platform for enterprise:

  * Enterprise activity will gravitate to cost centers.. be it manufacturing or IT
  * No Phd's will be employed to do programming task in any such center beyond probably a top 1-3% of the tech staff, but they do from their places contribute a good deal..
 * Enterprise software usage is not dictated as much by performance and minutae but by perception at large, availability of skilled resource in large easy to hire numbers (Java in Stanford  is great news for corporates..!)
 * Enterprise will throw hardware, lower cost dev to compensate for anything that makes it more flexible and manageable and eventually guarantees in some manner a longer term returns on investment
 * Enterprise managers want to bank on a face/ entity they can lay the blame on for issues, without being questioned why they chose X over Y. Also get resolution for critical issues within some timeframe.. even upto a year at times from MS, Sun , Oracle or IBM.. Following the herd, howsoever right or wrong it is helps in that direction
 
Lots to say.. but the brief note is this is a huge endeavor and what is correct and right cannot be prescribed by one person in entirety. We all do the best and contribute directly into the framework viz: If Guido can get a version of Pharo fast and enterprise ready.. great all the better.. He can contribute his code/ works which without bias passes muster.. great. We all win.

No cathedral has been built in a year.. but appreciate the fact that we are on a path well forked. Hands are always needed...!
  

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Andreas Wacknitz <[hidden email]> wrote:

Am 14.02.2012 um 20:01 schrieb Guido Stepken:

> Get the development process developed!
>
Guido, you seem to have interest in Pharo, even if it doesn't fit your needs today.
You also seem to have "the right" connections and money. What about turning this into something positive
for you, your customers and the whole community?
Make a list of things you want to have. Make the things more concrete than in your last posts. An wave with a bundle of money.
You will maybe raise the interest of some of the brilliant guys here and can convince them to do what you want. From what you
wrote within this thread I would bet that you will be able to offer more than $100,000 -  a very convincing argument and maybe enough
to get what you want from Pharo!


Regards,
Andreas




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Guido Stepken
The development process of Pharo needs to be developed!

There *are* hundreds of Smalltalkers outside, *unused resources*, a few dozen of enterprises paying *millions* of dollars each year on licensing cost for VS, VA, GEMSTONE, *unused money for Pharo development*

Get the development process correct, means *business oriented*!!!

And please stop to see who did *contribute* to Pharo! If the process ist well designed, there will be lots of contributors as well as enough money to hire hundreds of smalltalk professionals.

tnx 4 understanding, Guido Stepken
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Tobias Pape

Am 2012-02-14 um 21:25 schrieb Guido Stepken:

> The development process of Pharo needs to be developed!
>
> There *are* hundreds of Smalltalkers outside, *unused resources*, a few dozen of enterprises paying *millions* of dollars each year on licensing cost for VS, VA, GEMSTONE, *unused money for Pharo development*
>
> Get the development process correct, means *business oriented*!!!
>
> And please stop to see who did *contribute* to Pharo! If the process ist well designed, there will be lots of contributors as well as enough money to hire hundreds of smalltalk professionals.
>
> tnx 4 understanding, Guido Stepken


d o.O b


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

S Krish
In reply to this post by S Krish
I must correct some notions.. the time I hope is right for that...

"In India a Smalltalk developer is about 600$/Month. Fully qualified."

I am sorry to point out.. if you pay in peanuts, you will attract monkeys..!... It costs upwards of 2500$ / mo now..! Just the remuneration add the office costs and other bits to it.. it is more like 5000$ and more.. And at that cost you are not getting anyone with top notch skills, you will have to be lucky to get one in Smalltalk. 

Java, Ruby, Python , C++ , Oracle, DB2 .. yes you can at probably half as much too..!

There is an old paradigm of training freshers in.. but generally their skills are almost non-existent in terms of contributing effectively to do refactoring at scales required for Pharo.. testing yes, examples yes.. tutorials yes.. but framework , understanding internals..in depth not so much

But this is more to do with the fact Smalltalk today in India, attracts not one from the premium segment of students from any of the top univ but only the filtered not really fitting into anything else types. We can change that drastically if we can move in Pharo into all the Universities and academics but that is one hell of red tape to jump over.

Get a Thoughtworks, Trilogic , Google , Facebook  in India to adopt Pharo and see the upswing in the next 3 years.. but costs.. I would say compare to the West..


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Stéphane Ducasse
In reply to this post by Tobias Pape


> d o.O b

so cool tobias

I like

O_o

too.



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Michael Haupt-3
... AFAIC it boils down to:

"meh."

Michael

P.S.: Ever heard of Terminator Syndrome?

Am 14.02.2012 um 21:36 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>:

>
>
>> d o.O b
>
> so cool tobias
>
> I like
>
> O_o
>
> too.
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Are Objects really hard?

Marcus Denker-4
In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko

On Feb 14, 2012, at 5:08 PM, Guido Stepken wrote:

>
> Lookup Google "Pharo hanging" ... very few companies are really using Pharo, but i am not the only one reporting this.
>
> Tnx for the "troll".
>

It is much more interesting to google

        "Guido Stepken" Troll

Just have a look:

        http://www.google.com/search?ls=en&q=%22Guido+Stepken%22+Troll

We are not the only one who think that you are wasting everyones time.

--
Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de


12345
Loading...