301–310 of 570 posts
I'm not sure where this originates from, but the most succinct definition I've heard for "Enterprise Software" is that the person who pays for it isn't the person who uses it.
-it's very hard to sell
-usually it's crap
-maintenance is expensive
-many use it just to keep their job
-many furtively use better products from young startups
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sometimes I wonder, what if we just fundamentally took a new approach the OS. Today at the root of your operating system is the file system. It would be interesting if the file system was changed to essentially the concept of a simple object store. In much the same way we have "standard file formats" today, we could move to something like a "standard class". Objects would be a first class citizen in the OS. I think t…
As others have pointed out, what you're describing isn't a fundamentally new idea or even that revolutionary. You're basically describing a database filesystem. Onne Gortner attempted an implementation of this concept in 2004 as part of his/her master's thesis (see http://dbfs.sourceforge.net/ ). Systems like Spotlight are effectively a partial implementation of this concept- OS X essentially has a hybrid setup where…
but what if the overall model/structure is really what sucks?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> big data workflow involves loading millions and millions of records Dude, if it fits on your laptop disk, it's not big data. Here you're talking about “big data” that fits in RAM on my cellphone . Somebody needs to get over himself.
But if Google Sheets can't fit the data they are using, it is by definition "big data", even if it's not Big Data. I think this over-protectiveness of the definition doesn't really serve anyone.
Put another way, that Bob thinks he's dealing with "big data" doesn't mean he is in fact.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ditto with job applicant portals. They have a bunch of weird features for doing obscure HR stuff like internal approval chains, but terrible UX for the actual applicant. Would it be so hard to handle applicants whose resume is a url?
A couple of years ago, I was applying to work for a big government contractor, and even though they wanted to hire me, they couldn't figure out how to move forward past the "contigent job offer" phase in their new hiring software. I ended up taking a job somewhere else after going back and forth with HR for over a month as they tried to figure out things on their end.
Steve Jobs made this point very well in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLvvzktuVY8
https://www.cmswire.com/information-management/everything-yo...
https://werd.io/2016/stop-writing-specs-start-finding-needs-...
I could go on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody hates Photoshop. In fact it's one of the most loved software out there. I'm a developer and a Photoshop user and love it. The Unix philosophy would be a disaster for a image editing software (ImageMagick much?) Once a developer who spent all day in VIM & co was honestly arguing with me that Photoshop should be a command line app. I filled that under "shit developers say" and "delusional".
Same, but for Illustrator. I hate the price and subscription model, and the learning curve has some steep spots, but once you're up and running, it's fantastic. I want to like Inkscape, but I've hit too many weird bugs (text getting squashed, transparency disappearing randomly). I'm curious about Affinity Designer though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not so much in Venezuela right now. And, FBOW Linux has the Gimp, which I prefer to Photoshop, though that's largely on account of familiarity. ImageMagick itself is invaluable when what you need to do is programmatically change large numbers of images. I've seen it used on large (multi-million user) image-heavy sites as the standard image handling flow (thumbnails and default previews of standard sizes).
> Not so much in Venezuela right now. Yeah but that's not because of the software itself.