|
I recently walked into the Clark Bar and ordered a drink but the waitress caught me snickering and told me to go to the Mars bar if I wasn't going to behave. But I got my drink and now Almond Joy.
Everyone has a photographic memory; some just don't have film. Steven Wright
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keep that hammer...its also handy for fixing your Swift applications. Afterwards, the machine won't run to test it, but its easiest to assume the application is fixed 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Often times, that's the case. Look at IE. Because it was/is automatically bundled with the OS, folks (at the time) had no reason to shop around for anything else.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
David Crow wrote: automatically bundled with the OS, folks (at the time) had no reason to shop around for anything else.
So true.
Which is also probably proof of how bad IE was because users were finally forced into shopping around.
And when they did, they never went back.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote:
Which is also probably proof of how bad IE was because users were finally forced into shopping around.
I used IE for many years with nary an issue. I only recently switched to using Chrome because a web site that I frequent often did not work with IE. Now I suppose I could say the same for Chrome. while I use it exclusively at work, I can't use it at home. I've been told it may have to do with DNS hijacking, but I've not fully researched that.
For outlier cases, IE may not have been the tool for some folks. Not because it was so bad, necessarily, but more than likely they needed it to do one very specific thing that it either did not do or just didn't do as well as another. Put 100 people in a room with IE, and you'll have 100 people tell you they hate IE, maybe because it does not do something they need, or maybe peer pressure. People judge on the 1 thing software can't do rather than the 99 things it can do.
YMMV.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
David Crow wrote: People judge on the 1 thing software can't do rather than the 99 things it can do
I agree with that 100%. It's not right. It is also a factor that seems to be making software a commodity.
There are billions of apps.
This one doesn't work.
Download another.
It doesn't work either.
Download another. 
|
|
|
|
|
Use the best tool for the job. I use both IE (and its successor, Edge) and Chrome to debug Web code. When the issue at hand is cascading style sheets, I lean towards Edge, but when it's single-stepping JavaScript code, I lean towards Chrome.
David A. Gray
Delivering Solutions for the Ages, One Problem at a Time
Interpreting the Fundamental Principle of Tabular Reporting
|
|
|
|
|
"Easy to install" was the "main reason", which could be a deciding factor for a technology. I tried to install iOS on an android phone and finally gave up.
TOMZ_KV
|
|
|
|
|
You can't get there from here.
|
|
|
|
|
Popular and widespread? I had never heard about it until now.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home brew cocoa pod beer. Such travesty. I would like that Ramsey guy to taste and review it.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Ease of installation might be a reason that a Linux app is popular... 
wget https:
sudo dpkg -i google-chrome-stable_current_amd64.deb
sudo apt-get -f install -D
sudo apt-get update
sudo bash -c 'for i in update {,dist-}upgrade auto{remove,clean}; do apt-get $i -y; done'
|
|
|
|
|
You gotta admit, it's actually a very much valid reason, at least if you're targeting end-users. If your app can't be easily deployed after development, then you pretty much failed from the get-go.
Although I too think that the main reason shouldn't be that, but something tangible.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Answer... Windows .BAT/.CMD files... because you can count on them being able to run (sometimes, LOL)
|
|
|
|
|
A hammer! Dang, dude, you've got all the fancy tools! Usually, all I have is a wrench to pound a screw in. 
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Lovekamp wrote: Usually, all I have is a wrench to pound a screw in.
True LOL! 
|
|
|
|
|
Think of it the other way around: If it was next to impossible to install, and a RPITA to maintain, would it be likely to become a very popular and widespread application? Or desktop OS?
Years ago, I made a two serious attempts (months/years apart) to install an alternate OS on my home PC, without success - I am a Comp.Sci Master, but the OS was delivered without a hacker, and I simply couldn't make it work. My third try, a couple of years later, did succeed. But at that time, I had obtained so many really great Windows applications - certainly not of OpenSource quality, but made by professionals in the application domain. My home PC activities so much depend on these tools, that even though the alternate-OS machine was sitting there, it never could solve my real home issues better that the Windows applications. Not for my photo/video hobbies. Not for my music/sound activities. Not for my writing. Not even for my hobby programming (because that very often relates to my other tools; cross development for Windows, or even dotNet, never was a strongpoint of the alternate OS.)
OpenSource developers make similar great quality in their own application domain - superb compilers, version control systems, networking libraries etc - but when you move out of the software development domain, over to, say, media production or general office tools or economics, the OpenSource communities are not at a competitive level. Sure, some professional developers in other domains sometimes make the source code available, but for all practical purposes, it is more like documentation than for collaborative work towards the next version. Publishing the source code doesn't make it into "an open-source project". The first two OSes I worked with, Exec-8 for the Univac 1100 mainframes and Sintran for the Nord 16-bit mini machines, were distributed in soure code form to customers (although for Sintran only in a hardcopy version) - noone would claim they were open-source projects.
IBM was king for 20-30 years because they had their people out in the customer environments and knew the needs of the customer. Windows has been king for 30 years because you can use it even if you don't have a 14 year old hacker nephew. The smartphones succeed because the user interface is so that even your old aunt can make sense of it. Ease of use, and the ability to solve the customer's problem as well as (or better than) it solves the developer's problem, ARE keys to success.
|
|
|
|
|
Those are all actually very good points and I agree.
However, it removes a bit of the power of my condescending humor about cocoapods... and for that you lose debate points.
|
|
|
|
|
He apparently likes to do that....
http://www.startrek.com/uploads/assets/articles/picard7.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A-wPxhsCcAAw5ca.jpg
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
A mad thing I remember hearing about apparently Star Trek The Next Gen was financed in part by the CIA?..
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
Infection alert!!
