Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Six Laws of the New Software

CowboyNeal posted more than 9 years ago | from the listen-to-the-law dept.

Software 313

LordFoom writes "Still suffering from post-dotcom stress disorder, I keep my eye out for gentle balm to sooth my ravaged psyche. The manifestos at ChangeThis are not it. The most popular manifestos range from irritating to enlightening, with none of them particularly comforting. In particular the recent Six Laws of the New Software have done my dreams of writing lucrative code no good - although it has changed my idea of what money-making code is."

cancel ×

313 comments

In a nutshell (5, Informative)

winkydink (650484) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568757)

Keep it simple
Keep it small
You're not gonna be the next Microsoft
Do many releases
Comply with relevant standards

Re:In a nutshell (5, Funny)

cyber_rigger (527103) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568812)

7. Don't post a link on /. to your development machine.

Re:In a nutshell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569167)

8. ????
9. Profit!

Re:In a nutshell (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568822)

taco is an ugly fagger
cowboikneel is not much better.

hear the weather is finE finE finE
in nagasaki.

only: this

Re:In a nutshell (4, Funny)

jsprat (442568) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568891)


  1. Keep it simple
  2. Keep it small
  3. You're not gonna be the next Microsoft
  4. Do many releases
  5. Comply with relevant standards

That's 5 laws... What's the sixth?

Profit?

Re:In a nutshell (3, Funny)

winkydink (650484) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568917)

Simple covers 2. I simplified. :)

Re:In a nutshell (1)

DesertBlade (741219) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569135)

6 is the perfect number of laws, 5 doesn't work at all. Whats next 4 laws, then 3.

Stop the madness.

Re:In a nutshell (1)

secretsquirel (805445) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569241)

6. Never pick-up from a cheap street hooker without first checking to make sure she doesn't have a weewee, unless of course you're in to that kinda shit.

Re:In a nutshell (1)

tedgyz (515156) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569113)

That's only five.

Re:In a nutshell (2, Insightful)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569192)

You'll never be the next Microsoft thinking that way. Think big, have great unstoppable vision. Play to win, or give it up now.

Re:In a nutshell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569201)

The question is, do you want to be the next microsoft.. especially with the deep shit they are now in?

Re:In a nutshell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569219)

A blanket statement like "Do many releases" is dumb. Take NetBSD. They release when it's ready. They release when it's stable. You can pull the -current branch from CVS, if you so wish, but that's not really releasing. And you know what? NetBSD is great because of this.

In the end of last century... (5, Insightful)

melted (227442) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568763)

There was a widespread belief among physicists that there's nothing more to discover in physics. They were wrong. This guy is also wrong.

19th century, that is (1)

melted (227442) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568780)

19th century, that is

Re:In the end of last century... (1)

Radio Shack Robot (640478) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568940)

You ideas sound intriguing. How can I subscribe to your newsletter?

HOWTO: Subscribe to parent's newsletter (3, Funny)

SlimFastForYou (578183) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568970)

Step 1: Get rope
Step 2: Tie it in a noose
Step 3: Get a chair and stand on it
Step 4: Tie other end of rope to ceiling fan
Step 5: Put noose over head, snugly over neck
Step 6: Kick chair out from under yourself
Step 7: ???
Step 8: Newsletter!

*Poster does not endorce subscriptions to this newsletter.

Re:HOWTO: Subscribe to parent's newsletter (3, Funny)

Radio Shack Robot (640478) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568984)

Your ideas sound intriguing. How can I subscribe to your newsletter?

Re:HOWTO: Subscribe to parent's newsletter (1)

Peter Cooper (660482) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569104)

Hmm, much like tricking people by saying 'rm -rf' will 'fix [whatever]' , isn't posting this asking for trouble? Last thing we want is people actually trying this.

Re:HOWTO: Subscribe to parent's newsletter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569114)

Last thing we want is people actually trying this.

Are you sure about that?

Re:HOWTO: Subscribe to parent's newsletter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569180)

*Poster does not endorce subscriptions to this newsletter.

You misspelled "endork."

Re:In the end of last century... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569262)

You ideas sound intriguing. How can I subscribe to your newsletter?

If you're going to trot that out you could at least bother to get it right.
I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:In the end of last century... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569191)

Take for example the problem of word processors and that they're not suited to writing a single source that can be used for the web or for print.

No one's solved this yet. Microsoft haven't. Conglomerate is only part of it. The publishing flow could be so much better and all organisations with websites and print want it.

Manifesto? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568766)

Try Crapifesto! Did anyone actually read that before it was posted? If so, have their eyes stopped bleeding? Just wondering if I should see a doctor.

First Law of Reading Slashdot (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568768)

Dont bother... its old reposted irrelevant "news"

Here's another law to add (5, Insightful)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568773)

When developing a web browser, if a plug-in needs to be launched, don't let the plug-in's loading cause all other instances of the browser to lock up.

I'm looking at you, Firefox.

What's the deal with the PDF-format anyway? The document is 17 pages of Powerpoint-like slides. I'm sure some nice, simple HTML could have displayed that much more quickly. And not locked up Firefox for a minute.

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568781)

Upgrade to Adobe Reader 7. Much improved.

Re:Here's another law to add (1)

novakyu (636495) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568880)

Upgrade to Adobe Reader 7. Much improved.

You mean the Adobe Reader 7 (Linux) Beta that Adobe pulled off their website [adobe.com] ?

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568899)

No, I meant the Windows one that was released in a "final" form.

Re:Here's another law to add (1)

randallpowell (842587) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569141)

XPDF works fine. Low overhead and no fancy, liberal UI.

Re:Here's another law to add (4, Insightful)

cmowire (254489) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568821)

Disable the acrobat plugin.

Not only does this prevent Firefox from freezing up obnoxiously, but it also means that you don't see the file until it's actually done loading. Progressive PDF's suck.

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568844)

Firefox bug or Acrobat bug?

Seeing as how the elite Firefox team (invite-only, newbs!) is willing to pawn off responsibility for a simple bug like the Slashdot layout problem on the bad formatting of the page rather than taking responsibility for the bug in their own code, I am willing to accept that this is a bug in Firefox.

Fix the plug-in system, Firefox!

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568914)

How exactly does fixing the bug [mozilla.org] equate to refusing to take responsibility?

Re:Here's another law to add (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568932)

If you look closely, the bug uses a workaround trick to get the pages rendered correctly. If it rendered it correctly in the first place, they wouldn't need to worry about this.

And every single time this issue is brought up, someone tries to defend Firefox's broken rendering as a bug in Slashcode. While Slashcode may be broken, this particular problem is in Firefox and can be generated with 100% W3C compliant code (see bug report).

Until just recently, the Firefox team has ignored this issue as an external bug. Even now, they only provide a "fix" which is nothing more than a workaround their broken rendering engine.

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569015)

What is "rendered correctly" for invalid html? If Slashdot were valid html, or even close, there'd be no issue.

Re:Here's another law to add (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569032)

Read the bug report. The 100% valid HTML sample renders incorrectly. This is a Firefox bug.

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569071)

If I'm looking at the sample you have in mind (which you could link to), I don't see how a TD with a width of 100% alongside another TD will result in anything good.

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569096)

A TD with a width of 100% should take up the room allotted to it in the table, i.e. 100% of the table width. It should not default to 100% of the screen when the rest of the page layout specifies that there is a separate table elsewhere on the page.

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569259)

If it rendered it correctly in the first place, they wouldn't need to worry about this.

Uh, right. In other words, if software developers were infallible, there would be no bugs. That's not exactly a revelation.

My point was that they are not blaming Slashdot. They acknowledged the problem and fixed it. Some people just have to find something to bitch about, I guess.

Re:Here's another law to add (1)

NitsujTPU (19263) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569212)

As a fellow Linux user, I must also state that the fact that PDFs cause FireFox to fail so upsets me greatly. My department of computer science uses PDFs quite a bit (ie, I'm downloading papers) and FireFox freezes.

It's a real conversation starter if an MS supporter is nearby.

Re:Here's another law to add (2, Informative)

ufnoise (732845) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569226)

Disable the acrobat plugin.

Easier said than done. If you try and hide the plugin, mozilla and firefox often go looking for it. Eventually I had to just delete the shared library on linux. On windows, I had to edit the preferences file to look for a version of acrobat that didn't exist yet.


The plugin is so annoying because its toolbars take up a lot of space along with firefox's.

Re:Here's another law to add (2, Informative)

dabigpaybackski (772131) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569238)

Disable the acrobat plugin.

Yes, disable it, and use a quick and functional third-party PDF viewer like this one. [foxitsoftware.com] Acrobat in an ponderous, bloated abomination, kind of like Mothra in larval form.

Re:Here's another law to add (1)

kerrle (810808) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568838)

I'm sure some nice, simple HTML could have displayed that much more quickly.

And that is why I hate PDF - at least for most of the things it's used for, there are far better ways to do it.

It doesn't help that Adobe's Acrobat reader is absolutely terrible.

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568848)

...but it's better than any other PDF-reading plugin.

better, eh? (1)

SweetAndSourJesus (555410) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569064)

ahem [schubert-it.com] .

Re:Here's another law to add (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568879)

Stop using shitty second-rate operating systems.
Look amazing on winXP and Firefox. No hanging.

Re:Here's another law to add (1)

bryce1012 (822567) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568905)

In most cases that I've seen, it's actually a problem with Firefox - but only if you've got Acrobat Pro installed. That's the only difference between 2 of my machines - one hangs, one doesn't. Simple as that.

Re:Here's another law to add (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568930)

It doesn't help that Adobe's Acrobat reader is absolutely terrible.
Apparently you misunderstood the business model.
However, before you scream 'capitalist', consider all of the real world historical examples of Marxism.

Re:Here's another law to add (3, Informative)

sglider (648795) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568994)

This link from the Firfox FAQ [mozilla.org] answers why that happens. It isn't Firefox's fault, but it is adobe's fault. If you follow that link, you'll see adobe pages load (on a broadband connection) in mere seconds.

Re:Here's another law to add (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569014)

No, that page skirts the issue.

The issue that the parent noted was that ALL Firefox instances freeze up when Acrobat is loading.

One instance freezing is acceptable (not really, but whatcha gonna do?), but all instances freezing is a bug in Firefox.

Re:Here's another law to add (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569110)

I use GSView. Clears up the problem nicely(though PDFs don't always work QUITE the same way)

The first law of new software... (4, Funny)

neuro.slug (628600) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568783)

The first law of new software is you do NOT talk about new software.

The second law of new software is...

C'mon, somebody had to say it.

Re:The first law of new software... (1)

SaidinUnleashed (797936) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569070)

>>The second law of new software is...

Don't expect it to work right on the first release, or the second, and maybe the third..?

^_^

Re:The first law of new software... (1)

Lucidwray (300955) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569120)

I hope you didn't lose too much hair as that joke flew over your head at the speed of sound.

Six Laws Safe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568787)

I hope safety is built in.

For thee with soft servers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568789)

coral link of article [nyud.net] (Six Laws)

Next time I'll check the link better. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568811)

Actual pdf [nyud.net]

lots of gmail (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568793)

Direct link (4, Informative)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568797)

Link to article [changethis.com]

Be careful, it locks up Firefox until it loads.

Re:Direct link (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568892)

No it doesn't. At least firefox in os X doesn't lock up.

Hint: How to avoid PDF lock-up in Firefox (5, Informative)

QuestionsNotAnswers (723120) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568928)

Tools | Options | Downloads | Plugins

Untick PDF.

Now whenever you click on a PDF link you are prompted if you want to view it in Adobe PDF viewer.

Works for me!

Re:Hint: How to avoid PDF lock-up in Firefox (1)

chowbok (467829) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568967)

I don't understand why people still use the Acrobat plugin. It made sense way back when external apps couldn't launch http links--it had to be a Netscape plugin so that PDFs could link to web sites. But this stopped being a problem, oh, six years ago. So all Acrobat-the-plugin (as opposed to standalone Acrobat) does is make your window smaller and your browser more unstable.

Re:Direct link (1)

AstroDrabb (534369) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569033)

it locks up Firefox until it loads.
No it doesn't. I have it loading right now as I am writing this. I disable the Adobe Plugin and have Firefox open PDF files directly in Adobe itself. I hate having a PDF open in my web browser, be it IE or Firefox. (Go to Tools -> Options -> Downloads then click the Plug-Ins button and uncheck any Adobe item) I personally hate having most content open in a browser other than embedded movies like you see on Apple Trailers [apple.com] .

I always hated how IE would open up MS Word and MS Excel files in IE. You get a hacked down menu of options. IMO it is much better for a web browser just to be a web browser and fire off the application that is supposed to handle non-browser content. The only exceptions to this IMO should be Java applets, Flash and embedded movies.

Mirrordot Link (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568807)

http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/7900b722e2bf91ba0 321f6b16c25b973/index.html

Hope I'm not trolling too hard... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568819)

But seriously, I thought the dot com bust was actually a *good* thing for real programmers. It weeded out all those retards with a geology degree who were in it just for the cash. Granted, those who were actually good at coding made a lot more back in those days. But if you're actually talented then there is no reason you can't make what you want to make. Doesn't matter what the profession is.

Anyways, what's the deal with the .pdf download? First off it's /.ed, second... isn't that what the webpage is there for in the first place?

Re:Hope I'm not trolling too hard... (2, Interesting)

winkydink (650484) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568889)

Actually, it didn't. A lot of those retards hung on to their jobs while good people got canned.

The biggest thing that changed and has not changed back is that before the boom, people went into IT because they liked it, the money was secondary. Now, there are many people in IT for the money and to them it's just a job, not a passion.

Re:Hope I'm not trolling too hard... (1)

cduffy (652) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569006)

A lot of those retards hung on to their jobs while good people got canned.

It's quite hard to find good people still on the market these days, though, unlike 2-3 years ago (in Austin). Conclusion: Good people may have gotten canned, but by and large they've since been reemployed.

Re:Hope I'm not trolling too hard... (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569097)

Now, there are many people in IT for the money and to them it's just a job, not a passion.

Nothing wrong with that. If they went into accounting or marketing or sales they probably wouldn't be passionate about that, either. Just because they can't get paid for playing with their hobbies, they should be closed out of the labor market?

Re:Hope I'm not trolling too hard... (3, Insightful)

russellh (547685) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569022)

The geology, etc., majors I knew were awesome programmers. The morons I knew were computer science majors who were just in it for the money. I remember them in class. Most of my CS classes seemed to be full of them (1990-1994 - before the boom). I was shocked by this since I became a CS major out of a pure love of programming. the liberal arts and science people that I knew who were programmers had the true hacker ethic.

Re:Hope I'm not trolling too hard... (2, Insightful)

alan_dershowitz (586542) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569203)

He was talking about the "Geology majors" who were in it for the cash, not the Geology majors who just plain loved programming. Given a choice between non-CS moneygrubbers and CS moneygrubbers, I'd rather have at least the formally trained moneygrubber.

You could get hired without a degree, so a bunch of people ditched lower paying jobs to start programming by demonstrating basic skills. Compared to them, even the people who got a formal CS degree _for the money_ were better programmers than these other goofballs, primarily Visual Basic jockeys.

Sorry if I offended any VB programmers out there...Most VB programmers aren't idiots, but most idiot programmers program in VB.

Re:Hope I'm not trolling too hard... (1)

mr_null (16516) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569164)

Funny. I started out in 1996 in CS because I loved computers. In 2001 after working full time and doing school part time I switched to geology after I'd lost my love of computers.

Far happier now than I'd ever hoped.

Re:Hope I'm not trolling too hard... (1)

hairykrishna (740240) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569168)

I thought the point was that everybody got it in the ass, regardless of skill.

Don't knock the geology majors either. After all, someone has to find us all that oil. Too boring a job for us physicists and engineers- leave it to the rock monkeys.

Re:Hope I'm not trolling too hard... (1)

dabigpaybackski (772131) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569256)

It weeded out all those retards with a geology degree who were in it just for the cash.

Interesting--I've never met any retarded geologists. Are they allowed to use rock hammers when they're doing field work, or do they have to use the Nerf ones?

Respect your users (3, Insightful)

MarkSwanson (648947) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568830)

By and large there is no need to demand your users trust you with full write access to their home directory, their ethernet device, and more. Consider writing your software in the Java Web Start sandbox.

Re:Respect your users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569165)

uuh? sandbox ? the java web start "sandbox" allows you to do anything to the machine you want to do.
try the file shredder on pkt (pkt.sf.net) as an example.

Law 7 (5, Insightful)

DrKyle (818035) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568837)

All the good stuff has already been thought of, but not everyone knows they exist. Try to find really good ideas by looking back at least 10 years for a piece of software that never took off and has been abandoned and remarket it as the next big thing. Remember: Marketing people could sell blood to a turnip.

Re:Law 7 (1)

michaeldot (751590) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569193)

Yes, but why didn't it take off? A programmer's "really good idea" is sometimes an end-user's "cool but I don't need it."

What if no one cared about it then and for the same reasons won't care about it now?

I'm sure someone, *somewhere* has done a 3D spreadsheet that sold about 50 copies then went bust.

Reviving the concept doesn't mean it would sell any more now though, even if marketed better.

Still, you could be right - there could be really good ideas that just didn't make it because the GUI was bad or something. I just don't accept that all the good stuff has been thought of. New technologies create new possibilities.

PS I'm going to come back in an hour and find a descendant post linking to "World Famous 3D Spreadsheet Corporation, with annual revenues of 50 billion!"

Writing vs Coding (4, Insightful)

kiwidefunkt (855968) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568872)

It seems like some of these people spend more time writing about software than actually writing software...

Re:Writing vs Coding (1)

Tarcastil (832141) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568882)

The parent and this post feel ironic.

pdftotext (4, Informative)

flossie (135232) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568878)

The SIX LAWS of the NEW SOFTWARE
GO AHEAD AND PRINT THIS. This manifesto

continued

is toner-friendly: the backgrounds wont print on paper and are only visible on-screen to aid readability. We recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

by Dror Eyal
NEXT

Not using Adobe Acrobat? Please go to http://changethis.com/content/reader

The first wave of software is over, it is doubtful that any one company will capture the market like Microsoft or SAP did. Not because the software they write isn't better or has less functionality, they've simply arrived too late. Most home consumers have all the software they will ever need, and most companies out there already have all the basic technologies they need to successfully compete right now.
I can hear their objections all the way down here, and I agree, your software is better designed, faster, has more features, is more user-friendly and can indeed make seven flavours of coffee. We have something similar, it isnt well designed, it doesnt have half of the features that yours has and no, it doesnt run on Service Orientated Architecture. We did however pay a small fortune for the per-seat licences, we have learnt to use it quite comfortably over the last five years and this is the system that our business runs on. This view isnt limited to us -- Northwestern University economist Robert Gordon, in a 2000 article published in the Journal of Economic Perspectives, argued that "the most important GO AHEAD AND PRINT uses of THIS. This manifesto computers were developed more than a decade into the past, not currently."

is toner-friendly: the Its a fairly bleak view to be sure, but one that isnt unique to Mr Gordon. Many business backgrounds wont executives print on paper and are are turning away from purchasing new technologies and looking for new ways to use their only visible on-screen existing technologies effectively. Not because the new software entering the market to aid readability. We recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

isnt better, but because the functionality that they need already exists in software that was bought years ago. Budgets for software expenditure are dropping and the accountants are starting to question why the software that was essential last year needs an upgrade this year. What this means to the average software developer is that the window of opportunity for selling into the corporate market and to some the degree the home market is getting smaller than ever before. So does this mean that this is the end for the software industry? Obviously not, we will continue to develop better products, occasionally new technology will get developed and or a new idea will start a trend and software will get developed around it. Software that meets a new need will always be welcome. Who knew that we needed file sharing software before Napster turned the music industry on its ear? Or that social software and bloging tools were essential if your company was to be seen to be on the cutting edge? No, it isnt the end, but for every tool that revolutionizes the industry and strikes a path into a new territory there are several hundred software companies out there trying to build a better CRM or CMS -- the software industry equivalent of the mousetrap. Obviously it would be better if we all developed software that met a new need and created new markets, but just as obviously we cant all develop revolutionary new software. Most of the software being developed right now in studios around the world is trying to find a niche in existing and saturated markets. So how do you build software that stands out and can compete in this new environGO AHEAD AND PRINT ment? You build a tool based on new generation software laws. THIS. This manifesto
is toner-friendly: the backgrounds wont print on paper and are only visible on-screen to aid readability. We recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

SINGLE IDEA: The best way to succeed in the marketplace is to create software that fulfills a specific need. This may seem like an obvious point at first, but if you cannot explain to the end user what the software does in a single sentence it is probably too complex. Your first task is to ask yourself, "What does my product do?"
Most books about developing software start with the system architecture, some sort of UML diagram or a user requirements specification. In the new software, the place to start is to ask yourself what this product does? If you cannot describe this in a sentence to yourself, youll have a hard time convincing others about the usefulness of the software to their situations. This software is used for writing documents, for easily updating a website without having to know HTML, it allows you to share files with other people. It can do anything, as long as you can describe it in a sentence. By defining what the product does in a single sentence, youll not only develop a product that has an explainable need, but your product will fulfill a defined need. If the idea behind GO AHEAD AND PRINT your product is too complex youre going to face an uphill battle trying to communicate its THIS. This manifesto purpose. It can be a specialised need, it can be a need that your customer base doesnt know is toner-friendly: the that it backgrounds wont has, but if that need can not be condensed into a single sentence you will lose your audience. print on paper and are
only visible on-screen Most software vendors start off by developing a product which is stable and has a defined to aid readability. We recommend purpose. Once they are in the market they realise that there are competitors in the market printing a test page as with more features. They quickly make a list of the functionality the competitors have and some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

What are the most talked about manifestos? FIND out here.

build it into their product, shifting away from the single idea. The product suddenly becomes complex to use, weighed down with features it requires more processing power, a longer install and more pre-requisites. The market stops using it. Its too complex, it needs too high a spec machine. The company tries to gain back the market share by adding more features. The point Im making is dont try to keep up with the Joneses by adding every new feature and functionality into your product. Users want simplicity, they want to know that the product will send and receive email. They dont really care that it reads RSS feeds and can automatically search your favourites folder for updates. This simplicity in functionality is something that Google exploited with its simple interface. While Yahoo!, Excite and the rest of the search engines were developing massive portals, adding functionality and features, Google had two buttons -- Google Search and Im Feeling Lucky. One of the main reasons why people have been adding functionality into their software is not because the customers want it but due to softwares non-physical nature. You see, software isn't a physical good like a shoe, it never wears out. In theory, once you have bought a piece of software to send mail you shouldnt ever need another email client. There's no natural repurchase cycle. So if youre a software company how do you keep on making money off the same piece of software? The classical way of squeezing extra money out is to upgrade it. This is critical GO AHEAD AND PRINT to the economics of most software. Unfortunately the customers dont always want it. How THIS. This manifesto many features in PowerPoint do you really use? By adding extra features you can push up the is toner-friendly: the price of the software, but you also leave a huge market gap for software that fulfills a specific backgrounds wont need. Microsoft can afford to this, because they are Microsoft, you cant, and even they have print on paper and are had to compensate for this overshooting. When Office 97 was released unhappy customonly visible on-screen ers forced to aid readability. We Microsoft to issue a special program that enabled Office 97 files to be opened in recommend Office 95. The customers preferred the old software because it had fewer features. In the new printing a test page as software the only upgrades that are made are those that are requested by the end users. some older
printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

COLLABORATE: Forget enterprise systems that do everything possible within your field. They're too large, clumsy and require too much development time. Instead, create small discrete software that can collaborate seamlessly with the technology that the end users are currently using.
To develop an enterprise system that provides everything is a losing proposition. Rather, create small software that does not involve great investment in development and products that leverage existing software currently being used by your target audience and do not require armies of programmers. A small studio of three or four programmers should be able to turn out the kind of software I am talking about in about three to six months. By writing small software that doesnt take long to develop and collaborates with existing technologies, you can recoup the costs of that development many times over. Unsurprisingly, much of the technology that is currently in place in major corporations is actually being used by their staff. The new software states that you need to capitalise on this by developing complementary software. If you develop a word processor, you probably wont win very GO AHEAD AND PRINT much market share from MS Word, but what if you build a plug-in that allows you to easily THIS. This manifesto add mathematical equations, or a plug-in that allows you to convert the document is toner-friendly: the to PDF format, or one that allows you to convert a word document into an e-learning course backgrounds wont single click of a button? Now you have a huge market of MS Word users who need that with a print on paper and are extra specialised functionality and are willing to pay for it. Most of the large software compaonly visible on-screen nies have developed extensive and well documented APIs. Use them!
to aid readability. We recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

Even if you are not developing a plug-in for another system, you must have the ability to seamlessly collaborate with the technology that is currently being used. Dont fool yourself: operating systems have collapsed and disappeared without a trace because they couldnt open an Excel spreadsheet. You have to take existing software into account or your software will die a soft death on a shelf somewhere. In order to survive you must learn the art of collaborating. Dont try to recreate functionalit y that already exists in software tools that the user is currently using, rather leverage those tools and collaborate with them. The end user is familiar with those tools and they will be missed if you try to recreate them. If your system requires that you use a spreadsheet program, develop ubiquitous hooks that seamlessly allow the user to jump from your software into Excel and back. If your software requires that you have a word processing tool, develop your system as a MS Word plug-in, or take it one step better and develop your system as an MS Office plug-in. By extending the Office Suite your user can choose to either develop in Word or in Excel.

DISAPPEAR: No matter what kind of software you are creating, you have to simplify the interface. The greatest software in the world is useless if it is too complex to use. GO AHEAD AND PRINT THIS. This manifesto Decrease the interruption of the user experience by reducing is toner-friendly: the backgrounds wont the user interface to the point where only the essence is print on paper and are showing. only visible on-screen
to aid readability. We recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

Buyers have become much more demanding about usability, and by usability they mean that the user experience they are used to should not be interrupted. Add an extra button or two to their user experience and they will forgive you, but try to add a whole new piece of software which interrupts the way that they are used to working and you will lose them. We need to simplify the interface as much as possible. You want the user to not have to move away from her natural way of doing things and in order to do that your user interface has to disappear, to be unobtrusive, to be low-profile. If your software converts from Excel to PDF, then all it really needs is a single button to do its core function. If it must have management modules of some sort where you manage the settings of these conversions, these should be easily accessible through one or possibly two buttons. Every Information Architect will tell you that the average person cant remember more than x amount of buttons and y amount of abbreviations. This is all fine and well, but most small software companies dont have the benefit of an Information Architect so Id like to add another important rule, lets call it the Gates effect. It states that if you are uncertain about any element of the user interface, just think, What Would Microsoft Do? Microsofts usability has improved quite a bit since they moved to XP, but more importantly the majority of the people on this planet are working on Windows or Windows clones. Its a subtle effect, but subconsciously in the users mind when they want to close the interface GO AHEAD AND PRINT look at the top right hand corner for an small x icon. By developing to a standard they will THIS. This manifesto which the user is used to, you are not only decreasing time to competency but also decreasis toner-friendly: the ing interruptability.

backgrounds wont print on paper and are As technologists, we hold all sorts of knowledge that is tacit. We mostly don't realize that we only visible on-screen and we don't realize that our end users don't. We dont realize that most people possess it, to aid readability. We dont know that you should not repeatedly click the enter button because commands are recommend printing a repeatedly being sent and must be processed. Acknowledging the gap between technologists test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

and end-users is nothing new, and for years we have been arguing that software must be usable by "my mom." That the software must provide an out-of-the-box experience. The way to do that in the new software is to make the interface disappear, to not interrupt the user experience. Yes, the user interface is important as it is the core of the user experience but it shouldnt disrupt the user to the extent where they have to minimize or close their regular software and switch to yours. Software like netviewer, a desktop sharing tool provides hooks that allow the end user to change from her desktop to another without splitting the user experience, has completely disappeared. Zero interruptability.

SIMPLIFY: Do I have to go through a course to work with your technology? If so, you are already out of the market. I don't have time and I already have something similar which I'm used to.
Most people who are going to buy your software are going to have had experience of software. Even my grandfather from Haifa has had email for years now. To the average person, commercial web sites like EBay and Amazon are really sales software with an intuitive inGO AHEAD ANDrPRINTthat the average web user can easily understand and use without going on a course. te face THIS. This manifesto They know that a piece of software does not have to be difficult to use and doesnt always is toner-friendly: the require training. My grandfather orders books on Amazon. You cant send my grandfather on backgrounds wont a course, and if he doesnt immediately grasp your software he wont use it. print on paper and are

only visible on-screen At the company I work for they were looking for a Powerpoint to Flash converter to use in the to aid readability. We development of online material. Everyone in the company is proficient in using Powerpoint, recommend printing a test page as while the companys main method of content delivery via the web is flash. A tool that allowed some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

people to work in a medium that they were familiar with and could relate to, while at the same time produce material that could be used online was ideal. After considering a number of options which included products from some of the big software companies, they settled on a product that had a single button. No need for extra training, just one Convert to Flash button. The tool was a success because it retained the familiar interface everyone was used to in Powerpoint, it didnt require anyone to learn anything new, it had an easily conveyed function inscribed on its single button and most importantly it was easy to use. They could have gotten software with extra functionality which let the user edit the individual slides, add voiceovers or other rich media functionality, but the added interfaces would have required some training and getting used to by the authors. This tool had a non-existent learning curve and functionality that didnt require any training.

RELEASE: Start creating and releasing your software now. Think prototypes, iterative releases and user base. Don't spend your time on writing business plans, designing a website and choosing logos. The competition is moving a lot faster than you GO AHEAD AND PRINT may think. THIS. This manifesto
is toner-friendly: the backgrounds wont First mover advantage is not as important as various authors make it out to be -- Amazon print on paper and are was the third online bookshop -- but releasing a piece of software into market where there only visible on-screen are dozens of competitors is hard to recover from. While you were designing your website, to aid readability. We recommend your competition was releasing beta versions of their software into the market, testing the printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

Dont agree with this manifesto? Write your own. CLICK HERE for details.

waters and refining the prototype based on user requests, blog reviews and actual user experiences. It is very difficult to get a user to switch from bad software to good software once they have invested time in mastering the software. In the new software you develop a working prototype which performs the core functions in your system and release it. Release it in alpha, release it in beta, it doesnt matter, just release it. Let the people who are actually going to be using it give you feedback. If youve only spent three months developing it, it is not going to hurt as much to be told that a quarter of the functionality is not going to be used. It has happened far too many times that software has been designed according to "theoretical" best practice or some product managers notion is of what the users want or how they might perform their work. This results in fully developed systems that might match the workflow in an industry but do not take into account the idiosyncrasies and shortcuts that people in any industry develop over time. Its the idiosyncrasies and shortcuts that will increase your rate of adoption. It repeatedly amazes me how people will reject a piece of software and it will fall out of favour because it doesnt have a certain shortcut or the terminology is different to what they are used to. Some people swear by AOLs Instant Messenger because it has an icon that allows you to express a cheesy grin while Windows Messenger doesnt. Its minor but it can be GO AHEAD AND PRINT the difference between adoption and rejection.
THIS. This manifesto

We recently had a company who were interested in our Content Management System to upis toner-friendly: the backgrounds ate their website. They had been using a bloging tool to create a daily updated front page dwont print on paper and are unhappy that the system we were offering did not have a permalink system, we and were only visible on-screen tried pointing out that due to the nature of our system the URL of the page was equivalent to aid readability. We to the permalink. They were not convinced, so we added a small hyperlink at the bottom of recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

every page which linked to the very same page. The link was called permalink. They have since switched their entire operation to our system. Developing software by evolution is not something new, the software industry has always had iterative releases based on market demands. The new software just releases it a little earlier, lets the users have more say in the final design. Systems like the Wikipedia work on the same principle. The Wikipedia is an online encyclopaedia that has no editors, and anyone can contribute to it. Anyone. The old way of thinking would suggest that it would end up being a confusing mess of misspelled words, incorrect entries and spam. As it stands the Wikipedia is one of the most informative knowledge bases online. By releasing early and letting your user base make some of the decisions you are harnessing the same power to develop a better software. One which is more suited to the needs of your end user.

COMPLY: Find the relevant international standard in your marketplace and comply. This will enforce good architecture and keep your product on track when your customers will want it to integrate with their legacy software. You know they will GO AHEAD AND PRINT THIS. This manifesto want you to integrate. is toner-friendly: the

backgrounds wont print on paperost industries these days have standards that facilitate communication between different M and are only visible on-screen systems by defining language standards and their application. These standards add a uniform to aid readability. We interface to heterogeneous systems, allowing them to connect and share data and functionrecommend printing a test page as alit y without requiring modifications to their internal workings. In essence, these standards some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

define an agreed upon language so that the system doesnt have to worry about which software the request comes from, only that in response to a kind of request it should return a certain kind of response. This veil which is placed between the software and other systems it collaborates with erases the incompatibilities among various software companies and allows them to interoperate more or less seamlessly. You dont have to worry what kind of system is on the other side of that request, it could be someones open source Property Management System, a Point of Sale System developed in India or SAP HR. As long as they all comply with the same standard they are all equal. For the online learning industry this standard is known as SCORM and what it facilitates amongst many other things is the exchange of information between content vendors and content delivery mechanisms. An educational institution can buy any SCORM compliant content, safe in the knowledge that their content delivery system is SCORM compliant and will be able to deliver the content. HTML is a standard for the web. All software vendors who develop software that either views, displays or edits HTML comply with the standard, which means that content developed on Dreamweaver will not only be viewable on Internet Explorer but can also be reopened and reedited by Frontpage. Macromedia, who developed Dreamweaver, doesnt need to have ever GO AHEAD AND PRINT Microsofts product, they both comply. tested on
THIS. This manifesto

This the is toner-friendly: interoperability means that whatever your software does it will interoperate with any backgrounds wont other software that complies with the same standard. If you dont comply, your users will be print on paper and are a proprietary software system which requires you to develop proprietary tools to locked into only visible on-screen do everything. Going back to our HTML example, your browser developed by Microsoft will to aid readability. We only display content developed by Microsoft, thus limiting not only the market but also the recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

usefulness of your product. Would you use a browser that could only display pages created by same software vendor? Why does your software require you to? The second, often overlooked benefit to complying with international standards is that if you comply then most of the workflow of current systems in the industry, is documented for you. There is less chance that you will have that moment when your stomach rapidly condenses, as you realise that you developed a function while forgetting that crucial element which everyone in that industry knows is essential. We had that kind of moment recently while developing an application for the travel industry which uses the OTA standard. Somehow the ability to allow a person to book multiple rooms was left out of the system, not a big deal you might think, but the entire core of the system had to be rebuilt at a cost of months. A look through the OTA standard would have shown a list of details that should be sent through when making a booking. Number five on the list? Number of rooms.

GO AHEAD AND PRINT THIS. This manifesto

is toner-friendly: the backgrounds wont print on paper and are only visible on-screen to aid readability. We recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

info
ABOUT THE AUTHOR Chronic multitasker and software devotee Dror Eyal is dedicated to the creation of useful software. He has been developing software for more years than he can remember, both as a software analyst and as a programmer, and has had developed several award winning software packages. Some of those helped to push the boundaries of the software paradigm. packages have contributed to the mass of software that shouldnt have been built, while others have Over the last couple of years, Dror has developed his theory of what it takes to compete in todays

software marketplace based on work in commercial environments as well as the field of software art. It has been referred to by various reviewers as guerrilla software techniques, how to turn software into a product and the new software. He prefers the new software. DOWNLOAD THIS This manifesto is available from http://changethis.com/12.SixLawsSoftware SEND THIS Click here to pass along a copy of this manifesto to others. http://changethis.com/12.SixLawsSoftware/email SUBSCRIBE
GO AHEAD AND PRINT Learn about our latest manifestos as soon as they are available. Sign up for our free newsletter and THIS. This manifesto be notified by email. http://changethis.com/subscribe

is toner-friendly: the backgrounds wont print on paper and are only visible on-screen to aid readability. We recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

LAST PAGE READ

info
WHAT YOU CAN DO You are given the unlimited right to print this manifesto and to distribute it electronically (via email, your website, or any other means). You can print out pages and put them in your favorite coffee shops windows or your doctors waiting room. You can transcribe the authors words onto the sidethough, and you may not charge for it. NAVIGATION & USER TIPS the next page and the left arrow ( h ). To send this by email, just click on HAVING PROBLEMS SAVING TO DISK? First, make sure you have the latest version of Acrobat Reader 6 which you can download from http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.ht ml. If problems persist, it may be due to your Move around this manifesto by using your keyboard arrow keys or click on the right arrow ( f ) for walk, or you can hand out copies to everyone you meet. You may not alter this manifesto in any way,

Acrobat Reader settings. To correct the problem (for Windows), a reader, J. Hansen, suggests going to your Acrobat Reader Preferences > Options > Web browser Options. Check the "Display PDF in Browser" option. Then click on Save to Disk KEYBOARD SHORTCUTS
GO AHEAD AND PRINT

Zoom out THIS. This manifesto

is toner-friendly: screen/Normal screen view Full the backgrounds wont print on paper and are only visible on-screen to aid readability. We recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

info
BORN ON DATE This document was created on 24 January 2005 and is based on the best information available at that time. To check for updates, please click here to visit http://changethis.com/12.SixLawsSoftware
SOME RIGHTS RESERVED

cc

creative commons

COPYRIGHT INFO The copyright in this work belongs to the author, who is solely responsible for the content. Please direct content feedback or permissions questions to the author: fox@polka.co.za This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License. letter to Creative Commons, 559 Nathan Abbott Way, Stanford, California 94305, USA. ABOUT CHANGETHIS ChangeThis is a vehicle, not a publisher. We make it easy for big ideas to spread. While the authors we work with are responsible for their own work, they dont necessarily agree with everything available in ChangeThis format. But you knew that already. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/ or send a

GO AHEAD AND PRINT THIS. This manifesto

is toner-friendly: the backgrounds wont print on paper and are only visible on-screen to aid readability. We recommend printing a test page as some older printers do not support this Acrobat feature.

Re:pdftotext (4, Funny)

complete loony (663508) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569024)

That article didn't affect me whatsoever.
Right I'm off to print a test page.

Re:pdftotext (5, Funny)

coopaq (601975) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569051)

Would everyone just GO AHEAD AND PRINT this already!!!

Subliminal humor? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569182)

I can't helpGO AHEAD AND PRINT THISfeeling that some kind of backgrounds wont print on paper subliminal message are only visible on-screen to aid readability is embedded in this This manifesto this post.

Software not enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568881)

The best software may have been written,
but better servers will always be in demand...

7th law (0, Redundant)

maotx (765127) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568884)

Seventh law of software is to put it on a server that can withstand /.

Another law (0, Offtopic)

DWIM (547700) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568888)

Law: Software supported and promoted on web sites that can't handle the ./-effect will surely die.

3 Laws (0, Offtopic)

Gnubie5 (684730) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568898)

Materials contains rules which violate the 3 Laws of Robotics. Self-destruct sequence activated! ETA: 5:00 ENGAGING THRUSTERS NOW AT: Seattle, WA ETA: 2:00 BYE! (KaBoom)

The REAL 6 laws of code writing.... (3, Funny)

Hobadee (787558) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568925)

1. Make sure it's impossible to use.
2. Make sure it's buggy.
3. Make sure it's unsecure.
4. Market the hell out of it. (Making sure to state how great and secure it is.)
5. ???
6. Profit!

Re:The REAL 6 laws of code writing.... (1)

ThreatAdvisory (739109) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569012)

Step 4 needs revising:

4. Draw up costly and elaborate(to confuse) support and assurance packages that require yearly renewal for your clients and rope them in. Thats where the money is...

Re:The REAL 6 laws of code writing.... (4, Funny)

michaeldot (751590) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569043)

1. Make sure it's impossible to use.
2. Make sure it's buggy.
3. Make sure it's unsecure.
4. Market the hell out of it. (Making sure to state how great and secure it is.)
5. ???
6. Profit!

Very interesting, but you've clearly cut & pasted that from Microsoft's employees manual, in violation of your NDA.

Prepare for a visit from the lawyers.

Number 5 is.... (1)

John3 (85454) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569107)

Charge excessively high fees for product updates that are really just bug fixes.

The "Collaborate" Suggestion and Unix (5, Interesting)

Zergwyn (514693) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568936)

Most of these suggestions are common sense to anyone who has a couple of serious software projects under their belt, which isn't to say that they aren't worthwhile to look through. However, one in particular made me think of an old question of mine, having to do with the way unix works vs the modern GUI. On page 6, the pdf discusses the "Collaborate Law". It says:

"Forget enterprise systems that do everything possible within your field. They're too large, clumsy and require too much development time. Instead, create small discrete software that can collaborate seamlessly with the technology that the end users are currently using."

This, in a nutshell, seems to be the core philosophy behind much of the original Unix. Most Unix apps (and in particular, all the 'commands' which are small applications) have the concept of standard in (stdin), standard out (stdout), and standard error (stderr). Because most commands can operate to accept stdin, do its purpose, and then send to stdout, it is both possible, intuitive, and very practical to chain together many small commands to accomplish a single task very easily. I suspect there is some terminology for this process, but as I don't know what it is I generally think of it as being a "stream centered" approach. You have many discrete components operating on a stream of information. However, I know of no similar functionality in most modern GUIs, which are all basically application-centered approaches (though Windows tends to present itself as being document-centered). Each application is a single thing that you open up, and has its own self contained operations, usage, etc. I would like to see this more object-oriented stream approach exist in more GUIs today, because it is really a very useful paradigm for many tasks. It allows developers to concentrate on doing a single task extremely well, and then allows users to chain that task in as many ways as they can imagine, which is always more then what the original developer could think of. In Mac OS X 10.4, the Automator [apple.com] feature sounds like it might very well be close to what I have in mind, though a lot will depend on how easily and powerfully developers can make new 'Actions' (Apple's terminology for single task apps/commands). However, these days I really think that is an old concept that is time tested and very useful and just waiting for the right re-implementation to become critical for a new generation.

Re:The "Collaborate" Suggestion and Unix (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568991)

I believe the term you are looking for in sending output of one program to another is "piping."

Re:The "Collaborate" Suggestion and Unix (1)

michaeldot (751590) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569125)

That's a good point. The "Automator" could become the "|" pipe for a GUI system.

Instead of a CLI approach like:

funkyimageprocessor *.tif | morefunkyeffects > ~/processedimages/

It becomes a drag & drop thing for real GUI apps... Interesting stuff. I'm going to have to find out more about the Automator.

Re:The "Collaborate" Suggestion and Unix (1)

cnettel (836611) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569213)

That's called OLE/ActiveX in Windows. You can access basically anything you ever would like to do in the Office apps from any scripting language. No, it's not a GUI thing in itself, but all the richness of the GUI is exposed in a scriptable way. And the point is that you don't have to do it from within a macro in said application, you can do it from just about anything, including a web page!

(If the exposer of the object model was stupid enough to mark it safe for web scripting without thinking about what that really means. GRRGH.)

And I know it's not even close as common to use this as piping is for a *NIX user. But it's there and you can even write your own 3D engine in C++ by creating Word drawing objects and move them around. (That was fun in 1998 or smth... The framerate slownewss you can get is simply unbelievable!)

fuck your money (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568982)

fuck you and fuck your filthy money

As per instructions on the error page... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569102)

Dear webmaster@localdomain:
Your server gave me this error:
Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, webmaster@localdomain and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.
More information about this error may be available in the server error log.
Apache/1.3.26 Server at www.changethis.com Port 80
It just happened right after I submitted a link to your website from Slashdot.org
I don't know what may have caused it, but you certainly will be able to figure it out by looking at your logs.
Regards,
AC
P.S. I am sorry, I hope I did not break it!

Re:As per instructions on the error page... (1)

randallpowell (842587) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569174)

That article did have some good points of new software development. My main point is to test said software before release.

People are dumb (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11569170)

One good rule when writing software would be to assume people are profoundly retarded, thus maximising the possible market share of your software by making it really easy to use.

manifesto? (3, Insightful)

convolvatron (176505) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569202)

do the machinists create manifestos about their work? get over it, programming is mildly creative, but whole notion of paradigm-changing products is grossly overinflated. try doing something that has some obvious utility and dont try to ream people for it.

Six Laws of Perpetual Software Contracts (4, Funny)

saddino (183491) | more than 9 years ago | (#11569218)

/* todo: add six laws here */
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...