We've been frustrated to the point of abandonment on trying to install a Blackberry simulator to test out jquery-mobile apps. Similar story to tell--just kept hitting wall after wall of poorly thought-out and poorly documented steps.
It's a shame because most of our customers use Blackberries but it's just not practical for us to support Blackberry on our mobile apps.
In my experience Rackspace is good at providing customer support on top of single managed server instances. Their Cloud Sites and Cloud Files offerings (akin to ec2 and s3) feel less than stable, and their management interface encounters unrecoverable errors many times each session. In their Chicago data center they don't allow moving backup snapshots to s3-like storage, all backups are stored with the server. This alone should be a red flag to anyone who is doing any cloud hosting. It just feels like something they're trying to get into, instead of a core competency.
Amazon on the other hand has a much more diverse offering that feels at least somewhat battle tested and polished. They offer you the ability to clone a running server with single click, backups to s3, CDN, block stores, map-reduce, etc. They've also been around for a while, which isn't proof of a good product but it gives you a better feeling that they're serious about the business of cloud hosting (not just hosting).
Not that Amazon doesn't also have its issues. I've heard multiple reports of servers simply "disappearing", which is worrisome.
This disappearing does not happen as much anymore and they now have a lot of different tools which make recovery much faster. After awhile, you find that some of the things you need to do to protect yourself against such failures is good practice in general and using Amazon probably makes your site more reliable overall. In comparison, when I used SoftLayer, a hardware failure took down a site I had for 4+ hours while an engineer went to the machine, found out what was wrong, fixed it, etc. On Amazon, the same thing would take minutes to recover from.
The other way to solve this problem would have been for TV manufacturers to install limiters in TVs. The technology has been around for decades but it has never caught on. Regulation is a less-ideal solution to the problem vs technology because the feedback loop is long. Install a limiter in your TV today and the problem is solved immediately.
Seems like the manufacturing side might also be a market failure--it's a feature that most/all consumers want but since the market is fiercely price-competitive no manufacturer wants to pay for it. Still, it seems like a feature that Sony/LG/etc could advertise and gain a small amount of market share for.
And their ads could be really loud to get the extra attention of people they're trying to reach."THIS COULD BE THE LAST LOUD COMMERCIAL YOU HEAR!"I suspect this feature may have been in some TVs, but unless it's in all TVs from a company, other features may win out. Sure I wanted "smart sound" but I wanted PIP more. I also suspect that VOD, Tivo, torrents and others mean that fewer people are actually watching commercials anyway. This move is about 15 years too late.
Talk with some web designers who have been looking for a decent gui tool for git. They don't want to learn to use command line and aren't happy with existing tool support. They are your market. Go to a local designer meetup group and sell your software to every one of them.
Iterate on feedback, absolutely, but don't iterate on feedback of hackers, iterate on feedback of people who actually want your software and are in your target market.
If you're dead-set on developers as your market, there are a ton of folks who still use svn with a gui because "no good git guis exist". These are the non-power-users of version control. You're not likely to find them here or on super-technical sites, but they do exist and there are many of them. The unfortunate part is that if you market to them you'll probably end up having to build an Eclipse plug-in.
This is the biggest obstacle to getting web developers moved over to Git at work. I am moving the team to task branches over the next few months, and the whole idea of branching/merging/pushing/pulling is proving difficult for them to internalize. They can handle basic branching and the svn model, but for Git to be successful in my organization, I'll need something like this.
I registered to encourage development of tools such as this and to give it a thorough run-through at work.
Absolutely right! One of the guys I was working with at my last contract was an old Java guy that loved Eclipse. We talked about moving from SVN to Git but he resisted because there was no good, proven, stable, active development GUI for Git in Eclipse. Build that plug-in and you can charge for it - guaranteed!
Where you could improve: seems rather slow to load on Safari/Mac. Also bothers me that the mouse-over for sections near 333 is off-screen at 1280x960. Could you have it show up on the other side of the pin, just like it does when I click?
I've had Safari lose my sessions multiple times recently, including just now when iTunes lost my session multiple times while trying to edit account info. I'm assuming iTunes (on Mac) uses Safari under the hood?
It's the reaction everybody has with Rand. To be completely fair to her, she introduces a lot of people to ideas they haven't grappled with before. I'm still glad I read her, even if, three years after, I disagree with all but a strand of her ideas.
I doubt it's worth having another HN debate about Rand, though. We've thoroughly exhausted that discussion.
I have major disagreements with a lot of Rand's ideas, but I agree more with her social descriptions/depictions/??(I can't think of a really good word) now, 23 years after first reading Atlas Shrugged, than I did three years after reading it.
This one has some of the most elegant denunciations: This was one of the few arguments that wasn't overridden by one side or another.
But if you want a really terrific online discussion, I'm going to abandon ship and give you a link to MetaFilter instead, which starts with a series of critical articles and leads on to one of the most lucid, multifaceted discussions of Rand's many flaws I've ever seen. This was the discussion that severed the last of my connections to Rand and her philosophy.
But if you want a really terrific online discussion, I'm going to abandon ship and give you a link to MetaFilter instead, which starts with a series of critical articles and leads on to one of the most lucid, multifaceted discussions of Rand's many flaws I've ever seen.
I'm not defending Rand, but is it really intellectually honest to judge her stated principles by her behavior, as most of her critics do? Many of the most influential philosophers in all schools of thought have proven to be either hypocritical or downright nuts.
It's easy to attack someone as flawed as Rand, and it's even easier to attack strawmen fashioned from bits and pieces of her work. Neither of these facts tell you anything about the quality or relevance of her overall message.
Actually, the linked discussion mentions that also. When discussing such an inherently flawed philosophy, it's important to really think about the origins of Rand's thoughts. Why did she think the way she did? Who inspired her? Objectivism is not a stand-alone philosophy.
In particular, the talk about her and the mass murderer horrified me. When her ideal of humanity cut a young girl to pieces, you have to wonder if the sadomasochism in her philosophy was more a personal kink than it was some step of logic.