S E R V E R   S I D E
View current page
...more recent posts

iPod restaurant mix update: 744 songs - 2 days 5 hours 28 minutes of music taking up 3.60 GB of space. Almost there. Thanks to Big Jimmy for the serious infusion of afrobeat, latin jazz, and funk.
- jim 2-18-2002 5:27 pm [link] [add a comment]

My roomate for 3 years in college, D.R., was here over the weekend. We hung out on Friday night. He wrote today saying that he always seems to end up drunk on wine when he visits. All I can say is that it must be his fault because that hardly ever happens around here otherwise.

He's a real programmer doing some interesting things out in California. His company employs extreme programming. I've read some about this, but I've never talked to anyone who actually programs this way. The main idea involves pair programming.

All code to be included in a production release is created by two people working together at a single computer. Pair programming increases software quality without impacting time to deliver. It is counter intuitive, but 2 people working at a single computer will add as much functionality as two working separately except that it will be much higher in quality. With increased quality comes big savings later in the project.

The best way to pair program is to just sit side by side in front of the monitor. Slide the key board and mouse back and forth. One person types and thinks tactically about the method being created, while the other thinks strategically about how that method fits into the class. It takes time to get used to pair programming so don't worry if it feels awkward at first.
Seems cool, but my intuition accords with his findings: it's a good way to go if the people involved are very skilled programmers. On the other hand, putting me together with someone else on my level wouldn't really be very helpful. I wonder if it's something specific about coding that allows this to work, or could this approach benefit other pursuits?
- jim 2-18-2002 5:26 pm [link] [2 comments]

Cringely is urging Apple to port OS X to intel. Although this idea keeps being brought up periodically by various people outside of Apple, it is never going to happen. The notebooks and iMac might still sell, but the pro machines - which is where the biggest margins are for Apple - would be utterly devastated. People don't buy those machines for how they look, they buy them for the Mac OS. Despite what Cringely thinks, these hypothetical intel boxes would be Macs if they were running OS X, and the pros would buy them like mad because they'd be much faster and much cheaper.

But the larger issue is with support. Apple has a great advantage in only having to support a very small hardware set. Windows has the basically impossible task of running on countless different manufacturers hardware. Just supporting all the video cards alone might be beyond Apple's ability. Getting a port working is one thing, making it stable across the entire range of possible hardware (including every single combination of all those pieces) is completely different.
- jim 2-17-2002 2:59 pm [link] [add a comment]

older posts...