Search Results

Search found 5545 results on 222 pages for 'future'.

Page 2/222 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Developing Browser plugins. Spcially for chrome and firefox, what is the future?

    - by MobileDev123
    I am interested to learn developing some plug ins for chrome and Firefox browsers as hobby projects. However I know nothing about it, and I don't know if it is valuable for professional experience or not. Do you know anybody who's developing this kind of plug ins professionally? In case I can develop any plug in, does it have any significance in my resume? (Extra info: I have 1.5 years of experience in various Java Techs, from servers to mobile). How some companies and some other employers can see this plug in development professionally?

    Read the article

  • Ensure Future Browser Compatibility - SharePoint Branding

    - by KunaalKapoor
    HTML and Future Internet Explorer Compatibility with SharePointAs new versions of Internet Explorer are released, the way HTML is rendered by the browser could change over time. To address the possibility of changes, Microsoft uses the X-UA-Compatible META tag that targets HTML markup to a specific version of Internet Explorer. The default SharePoint 2010 master pages are set to force current and future versions of Internet Explorer to render HTML in Internet Explorer 8 mode like the following markup:<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatibile" content="IE=IE8" />The Adventure Works Travel HTML includes the META tag to help ensure future Internet Explorer versions will display the SharePoint HTML properly.For more information about the Internet Explorer Standards Mode, see META Tags and Locking in Future Compatibility.

    Read the article

  • Confused about my future. Doubt about .Net or Java way.

    - by dotNET
    I'm very confused about choosing the programming langage to follow in the next step of my life. I'm right now so familiar with C++, VB.NET and PHP, but to jump to a higher level I must choose between JEE(JSP, Servlets, JSF, Spring, EJB, Struts, Hibernate,...) and .NET(ASP.NET, C#). Because I cant learn them at the same time. And you realize that, when I mentioned JEE a lot of things comes to the head. In my personnal experience I prefere the .NET, but Java seems to be a better choice. believe me, i'm not writing a subjective topic. I just want to know what must I follow to get succes in my life. The question here is : Is there any things that can be done with Java, and cannot be done with .NET. Is there any chances that I can follow the uncounted number of frameworks that are always in developpement. ... (also something not said) ?

    Read the article

  • What is the Future of Search Engine Optimisation?

    Though those who are into Internet marketing would like to know what the future holds for them, but frankly, it is very difficult to predict this accurately. Forget about the future of SEO, actually it is very difficult to even predict the future of Internet and computers in general. For instance, if 40 years back anyone had predicted that a computer would be sitting on a table of almost every home in the country, then everyone would have thought that he or she was crazy.

    Read the article

  • how can I future-proof migration of a ADO.net local data layer to a future web based interface (web-

    - by Greg
    Hi, BACKGROUND: I am working on a .NET WinForms application now (C#) with an ADO.net database for the data layer. QUESTION: How an I develop this now such that it would be easy to migrate to a model where the data layer is abstracted via a HTTP web-service or REST interface? For example would just use of a standard C# interface with a Factory to obtain a concrete implementation of the interface where this uses ADO.net be the best? thanks

    Read the article

  • Which is the UI technology of the future considering: eye-candy-effect, interactivity (gestures, voc

    - by user193655
    If you had to write a next-gen application, in which on the surface (UI) you need some "futuristic features", by considering the following aspects which is the choice you'd make? 1) eye-candy: cool UI, 3D, Effects, nice graphics, sound transitions... 2) user interaction: not only mouse and keyboard but touch, voice and more.... + user interactivity aspect, which is the technology you'd choose? 3) X-platform: this is to have some X-platform discussion. Of course single platform technologies (as WPF) have may be some more power, anyway in a general discussion considering X-platform as a resource is important 4) available components: of course the coolest technology with no available components is may be an option for a component developer but not for an application developer My question is generic, but anyway * have in mind data-driven apps, not pure multimedia apps, videogames, ....

    Read the article

  • Integrating Global Knowledge Software and the Future of UPK

    With the acquisition of Global Knowledge Software, SAP and Oracle customers are wondering about the future of Oracle User Productivity Kit (UPK). Tune into this conversation with Sonny Singh, Senior Vice President, Product and Industries Business Unit to learn why Oracle purchased Global Knowledge Software, how an SAP solution fits into an Oracle strategy, and what that means for the future of UPK – the end user training and implementation solution for accelerating user adoption, ensuring the success of enterprise applications, and making organizations productive from day one!

    Read the article

  • The future for Microsoft

    - by Scott Dorman
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/sdorman/archive/2013/10/16/the-future-for-microsoft.aspxMicrosoft is in the process of reinventing itself. While some may argue that it’s “too little, too late” or that their growing consumer-focused strategy is wrong, the truth of the situation is that Microsoft is reinventing itself into a new company. While Microsoft is now calling themselves a “devices and services” company, that’s not entirely accurate. Let’s look at some facts: Microsoft will always (for the long-term foreseeable future) be financially split into the following divisions: Windows/Operating Systems, which for FY13 made up approximately 24% of overall revenue. Server and Tools, which for FY13 made up approximately 26% of overall revenue. Enterprise/Business Products, which for FY13 made up approximately 32% of overall revenue. Entertainment and Devices, which for FY13 made up approximately 13% of overall revenue. Online Services, which for FY13 made up approximately 4% of overall revenue. It is important to realize that hardware products like the Surface fall under the Windows/Operating Systems division while products like the Xbox 360 fall under the Entertainment and Devices division. (Presumably other hardware, such as mice, keyboards, and cameras, also fall under the Entertainment and Devices division.) It’s also unclear where Microsoft’s recent acquisition of Nokia’s handset division will fall, but let’s assume that it will be under Entertainment and Devices as well. Now, for the sake of argument, let’s assume a slightly different structure that I think is more in line with how Microsoft presents itself and how the general public sees it: Consumer Products and Devices, which would probably make up approximately 9% of overall revenue. Developer Tools, which would probably make up approximately 13% of overall revenue. Enterprise Products and Devices, which would probably make up approximately 47% of overall revenue. Entertainment, which would probably make up approximately 13% of overall revenue. Online Services, which would probably make up approximately 17% of overall revenue. (Just so we’re clear, in this structure hardware products like the Surface, a portion of Windows sales, and other hardware fall under the Consumer Products and Devices division. I’m assuming that more of the income for the Windows division is coming from enterprise/volume licenses so 15% of that income went to the Enterprise Products and Devices division. Most of the enterprise services, like Azure, fall under the Online Services division so half of the Server and Tools income went there as well.) No matter how you look at it, the bulk of Microsoft’s income still comes from not just the enterprise but also software sales, and this really shouldn’t surprise anyone. So, now that the stage is set…what’s the future for Microsoft? The future I see for Microsoft (again, this is just my prediction based on my own instinct, gut-feel and publicly available information) is this: Microsoft is becoming a consumer-focused enterprise company. Let’s look at it a different way. Microsoft is an enterprise-focused company trying to create a larger consumer presence.  To a large extent, this is the exact opposite of Apple, who is really a consumer-focused company trying to create a larger enterprise presence. The major reason consumer-focused companies (like Apple) have started making in-roads into the enterprise is the “bring your own device” phenomenon. Yes, Apple has created some “game-changing” products but their enterprise influence is still relatively small. Unfortunately (for this blog post at least), Apple provides revenue in terms of hardware products rather than business divisions, so it’s not possible to do a direct comparison. However, in the interest of transparency, from Apple’s Quarterly Report (filed 24 July 2013), their revenue breakdown is: iPhone, which for the 3 months ending 29 June 2013 made up approximately 51% of revenue. iPad, which for the 3 months ending 29 June 2013 made up approximately 18% of revenue. Mac, which for the 3 months ending 29 June 2013 made up approximately 14% of revenue. iPod, which for the 3 months ending 29 June 2013 made up approximately 2% of revenue. iTunes, Software, and Services, which for the 3 months ending 29 June 2013 made up approximately 11% of revenue. Accessories, which for the 3 months ending 29 July 2013 made up approximately 3% of revenue. From this, it’s pretty clear that Apple is a consumer-and-hardware-focused company. At this point, you may be asking yourself “Where is all of this going?” The answer to that lies in Microsoft’s shift in company focus. They are becoming more consumer focused, but what exactly does that mean? The biggest change (at least that’s been in the news lately) is the pending purchase of Nokia’s handset division. This, in combination with their Surface line of tablets and the Xbox, will put Microsoft squarely in the realm of a hardware-focused company in addition to being a software-focused company. That can (and most likely will) shift the revenue split to looking at revenue based on software sales (both consumer and enterprise) and also hardware sales (mostly on the consumer side). If we look at things strictly from a Windows perspective, Microsoft clearly has a lot of irons in the fire at the moment. Discounting the various product SKUs available and painting the picture with broader strokes, there are currently 5 different Windows-based operating systems: Windows Phone Windows Phone 7.x, which runs on top of the Windows CE kernel Windows Phone 8.x+, which runs on top of the Windows 8 kernel Windows RT The ARM-based version of Windows 8, which runs on top of the Windows 8 kernel Windows (Pro) The Intel-based version of Windows 8, which runs on top of the Windows 8 kernel Xbox The Xbox 360, which runs it’s own proprietary OS. The Xbox One, which runs it’s own proprietary OS, a version of Windows running on top of the Windows 8 kernel and a proprietary “manager” OS which manages the other two. Over time, Windows Phone 7.x devices will fade so that really leaves 4 different versions. Looking at Windows RT and Windows Phone 8.x paints an interesting story. Right now, all mobile phone devices run on some sort of ARM chip and that doesn’t look like it will change any time soon. That means Microsoft has two different Windows based operating systems for the ARM platform. Long term, it doesn’t make sense for Microsoft to continue supporting that arrangement. I have long suspected (since the Surface was first announced) that Microsoft will unify these two variants of Windows and recent speculation from some of the leading Microsoft watchers lends credence to this suspicion. It is rumored that upcoming Windows Phone releases will include support for larger screen sizes, relax the requirement to have a hardware-based back button and will continue to improve API parity between Windows Phone and Windows RT. At the same time, Windows RT will include support for smaller screen sizes. Since both of these operating systems are based on the same core Windows kernel, it makes sense (both from a financial and development resource perspective) for Microsoft to unify them. The user interfaces are already very similar. So similar in fact, that visually it’s difficult to tell them apart. To illustrate this, here are two screen captures: Other than a few variations (the Bing News app, the picture shown in the Pictures tile and the spacing between the tiles) these are identical. The one on the left is from my Windows 8.1 laptop (which looks the same as on my Surface RT) and the one on the right is from my Windows Phone 8 Lumia 925. This pretty clearly shows that from a consumer perspective, there really is no practical difference between how these two operating systems look and how you interact with them. For the consumer, your entertainment device (Xbox One), phone (Windows Phone) and mobile computing device (Surface [or some other vendors tablet], laptop, netbook or ultrabook) and your desktop computing device (desktop) will all look and feel the same. While many people will denounce this consistency of user experience, I think this will be a good thing in the long term, especially for the upcoming generations. For example, my 5-year old son knows how to use my tablet, phone and Xbox because they all feature nearly identical user experiences. When Windows 8 was released, Microsoft allowed a Windows Store app to be purchased once and installed on as many as 5 devices. With Windows 8.1, this limit has been increased to over 50. Why is that important? If you consider that your phone, computing devices, and entertainment device will be running the same operating system (with minor differences related to physical hardware chipset), that means that I could potentially purchase my sons favorite Angry Birds game once and be able to install it on all of the devices I own. (And for those of you wondering, it’s only 7 [at the moment].) From an app developer perspective, the story becomes even more compelling. Right now there are differences between the different operating systems, but those differences are shrinking. The user interface technology for both is XAML but there are different controls available and different user experience concepts. Some of the APIs available are the same while some are not. You can’t develop a Windows Phone app that can also run on Windows (either Windows Pro or RT). With each release of Windows Phone and Windows RT, those difference become smaller and smaller. Add to this mix the Xbox One, which will also feature a Windows-based operating system and the same “modern” (tile-based) user interface and the visible distinctions between the operating systems will become even smaller. Unifying the operating systems means one set of APIs and one code base to maintain for an app that can run on multiple devices. One code base means it’s easier to add features and fix bugs and that those changes become available on all devices at the same time. It also means a single app store, which will increase the discoverability and reach of your app and consolidate revenue and app profile management. Now, the choice of what devices an app is available on becomes a simple checkbox decision rather than a technical limitation. Ultimately, this means more apps available to consumers, which is always good for the app ecosystem. Is all of this just rumor, speculation and conjecture? Of course, but it’s not unfounded. As I mentioned earlier, some of the prominent Microsoft watchers are also reporting similar rumors. However, Microsoft itself has even hinted at this future with their recent organizational changes and by telling developers “if you want to develop for Xbox One, start developing for Windows 8 now.” I think this pretty clearly paints the following picture: Microsoft is committed to the “modern” user interface paradigm. Microsoft is changing their release cadence (for all products, not just operating systems) to be faster and more modular. Microsoft is going to continue to unify their OS platforms both from a consumer perspective and a developer perspective. While this direction will certainly concern some people it will excite many others. Microsoft’s biggest failing has always been following through with a strong and sustained marketing strategy that presents a consistent view point and highlights what this unified and connected experience looks like and how it benefits consumers and enterprises. We’ve started to see some of this over the last few years, but it needs to continue and become more aggressive and consistent. In the long run, I think Microsoft will be able to pull all of these technologies and devices together into one seamless ecosystem. It isn’t going to happen overnight, but my prediction is that we will be there by the end of 2016. As both a consumer and a developer, I, for one, am excited about the future of Microsoft.

    Read the article

  • The Future of Life Assurance Conference Recap

    - by [email protected]
    I recently wrote about the Life Insurance Conference held in Washington, DC last month. This week I was both an attendee and guest speaker the 13th Annual Future of Life Assurance Conference held at The Guoman Tower in London, UK. It's amazing that these two conferences were held on opposition sides of the Atlantic Ocean and addressed many of the same session topics and themes. Insurance is certainly a global industry! This year's conference was attended by many of the leading carriers and CEOs in the UK and across Europe.The sessions included a strong lineup of keynote speakers and panel discussions from carriers such as Legal & General, Skandia, Aviva, Standard Life, Friends Provident, LV=, Zurich UK, Barclays and Scottish Life. Sessions topics addressed a variety of business and regulatory issues including: Ensuring a profitable future Key priorities in regulation The future of advice The impact of the RDR on distribution Bancassurance Gaining control of the customer relationship Revitalizing product offerings In addition, Oracle speakers (Glenn Lottering and myself) led specific sessions on gearing up for Solvency II and speeding product development through adaptive rules-based systems. The main themes that played throughout many of the sessions included: change is here, focusing on customers, the current economic crisis has been challenging and the industry needs to get back to the basics and simplify - simplify - simplify. Additionally, it is clear that the UK Life & Pension markets will be going through some major changes as new RDR regulation related to advisor fees and commission and automatic enrollment are rolled out in 2012 Roger A.Soppe, CLU, LUTCF, is the Senior Director of Insurance Strategy, Oracle Insurance.

    Read the article

  • Take a Tour of the Future

    - by Tom Caldecott-Oracle
    Visit Our HQ Usability Lab During Oracle OpenWorld 2014 You want to look behind the scenes at the Oracle Applications User Experience Usability Lab on the campus of our headquarters. No problem. You’re invited to join an exclusive tour. When? Thursday, October 2 or Friday, October 3. Where? Redwood Shores, Calif.  And what will you see on the tour? The future—how we test future product designs and the advanced technology we use to do that. You’ll also view early demos of upcoming enterprise software designs for tables and mobile phones.  We’ll provide round-trip transportation, with the pickup and drop-off point being the InterContinental San Francisco.  Space is limited, so reserve your spot now. Want to know more about the tour and other Oracle Applications User Experience activities at Oracle OpenWorld? Visit UsableApps. Welcome to the future.

    Read the article

  • How do you get an object associated with a Future Actor?

    - by Bruce Ferguson
    I would like to be able to get access to the object that is being returned from spawning a future import scala.actors.Future import scala.actors.Futures._ class Object1(i:Int) { def getAValue(): Int = {i} } object Test { def main( args: Array[String] ) = { var tests = List[Future[Object1]]() for(i <- 0 until 10) { val test = future { val obj1 = new Object1(i) println("Processing " + i + "...") Thread.sleep(1000) println("Processed " + i) obj1 } tests = tests ::: List(test) } val timeout = 1000 * 60 * 5 // wait up to 5 minutes val futureTests = awaitAll(timeout,tests: _*) futureTests.foreach(test => println("result: " + future())) } } The output from one run of this code is: Processing 0... Processing 1... Processing 2... Processing 3... Processed 0 Processing 4... Processed 1 Processing 5... Processed 2 Processing 6... Processed 3 Processing 7... Processed 4 Processing 8... Processed 6 Processing 9... Processed 5 Processed 7 Processed 8 Processed 9 result: <function0> result: <function0> result: <function0> result: <function0> result: <function0> result: <function0> result: <function0> result: <function0> result: <function0> result: <function0> I've tried future().getClass(), and the output is result: class scala.actors.FutureActor What I'm looking to be able to access is the obj1 objects. Thanks Bruce

    Read the article

  • Does C# have a future in games development?

    - by IbrarMumtaz
    I recently learned that the MMO Minecraft is powered by Java from a recent interview on CVG.co.uk on a possible collaboration between two former and now competing colleagues. In the interview he bluntly said that the founder of Minecraft is a Java coder and he is a C or C++ coder so they are incompatible with each other. So collaborating on future projects will be difficult. This got me thinking, If Java could do that? What does the future hold for MS very popular C# language and .Net platform as far as games or mainstream games development is concerned?

    Read the article

  • Webcast: Navigating the Future of Customer Service

    - by Charles Knapp
    Customer service is set to change dramatically over the next five years – and now is the time to ensure you have the tools to help you succeed. On  Wednesday, June 13, join Oracle and Forrester Research to discover what the future holds and learn how you can: Empower your agents Delight your customers Shape your customer service future Our speakers are Kate Leggett, Senior Analyst, Forrester Research, and John Perez, Customer Experience Strategist, Oracle RightNow. Kate is a leading expert on customer service strategies, as well as a published author on customer service trends and best practices. Her research focuses on helping organizations establish customer service strategies and deliver successful customer service projects. John has extensive experience of working on customer experience programs with organizations across a range of industries. He works with Oracle RightNow clients to build customer experience strategies that improve efficiency and productivity, increase sales, and drive customer loyalty.

    Read the article

  • SPARC at 25: Past, Present and Future

    - by kgee
    Join us online to celebrate a quarter-century of innovation. Watch Scott McNealy, Bill Joy, and Andy Bechtolsheim along with other significant SPARC contributors discuss the challenges and rewards of consistently redefining the limits of enterprise IT. Hear Mark Hurd and John Fowler talk about the aggressive plans for SPARC’s future. All of this was recently captured in video at the SPARC anniversary event held at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California. In addition to getting unique insights from the people behind 25 years of SPARC technology, you can access exclusive content and resources, read case studies and e-Books, view webcasts and infographics, and more. Be sure to take some time to rediscover why and how SPARC was developed, the considerable impact it had on the entire IT industry, and the continuing innovations coming in the future.http://www.oracle.com/go/?&Src=7618691&Act=721&pcode=WWMK12044691MPP051

    Read the article

  • What programming technique / practice done by you was ahead of its time?

    - by Binoj Antony
    I once built a very good web application in ASP (classic) back in 2001 and extensively used XmlHttpRequest object in it. (I was lucky that the clients were only using IE, and only IE supported this object at that time). Then later when people started talking about AJAX in 2005, It felt good to have used something ahead (or early) of its time. Well, maybe this does not qualify to be listed as something done ahead of its time. Which programming technology/technique/practice have you done that was ahead of this time. One story per answer please. The title for this question taken from an opposite question here.

    Read the article

  • Using Completed User Stories to Estimate Future User Stories

    - by David Kaczynski
    In Scrum/Agile, the complexity of a user story can be estimated in story points. After completing some user stories, a programmer or team of programmers can use those experiences to better estimate how much time it might take to complete a future user story. Is there a methodology for breaking down the complexity of user stories into quantifiable or quantifiable attributes? For example, User Story X requires a rich, new view in the GUI, but User Story X can perform most of its functionality using existing business logic on the server. On a scale of 1 to 10, User Story X has a complexity of 7 on the client and a complexity of 2 on the server. After User Story X is completed, someone asks how long would it take to complete User Story Y, which has a complexity of 3 on the client and 6 on the server. Looking at how long it took to complete User Story X, we can make an educated estimate on how long it might take to complete User Story Y. I can imagine some other details: The complexity of one attribute (such as complexity of client) could have sub-attributes, such as number of steps in a sequence, function points, etc. Several other attributes that could be considered as well, such as the programmer's familiarity with the system or the number of components/interfaces involved These attributes could be accumulated into some sort of user story checklist. To reiterate: is there an existing methodology for decomposing the complexity of a user story into complexity of attributes/sub-attributes, or is using completed user stories as indicators in estimating future user stories more of an informal process?

    Read the article

  • Java Spotlight Episode 105: Mark Reinhold on the Future of Java

    - by Roger Brinkley
    Our yearly interview with Mark Reinhold, Chief Java Architect, Java Platform Group on the future of Java. Right-click or Control-click to download this MP3 file. You can also subscribe to the Java Spotlight Podcast Feed to get the latest podcast automatically. If you use iTunes you can open iTunes and subscribe with this link:  Java Spotlight Podcast in iTunes. Show Notes News Two Java Update Releases New Java SE 6 software updates from Apple for OS X 10.8, 10.7 and 10.6 are now live and available to all customers via the Mac App Store / Software Update. The JavaFX Community Site on Java.net JSR 360: Connected Limited Device Configuration 8 JSR 361: Java ME Embedded Profile 2012 JCP EC Election Ballot open Meet the EC Candidates Recording and Materials Events Oct 22-23, Freescale Technology Forum - Japan, Tokyo, Japan Oct 23-25, EclipseCon Europe, Ludwigsburg, Germany Oct 30-Nov 1, Arm TechCon, Santa Clara, United States of America Oct 31, JFall, Hart van Holland, Netherlands Nov 2-3, JMaghreb, Rabat, Morocco Nov 5-9, Øredev Developer Conference, Malmö, Sweden Nov 13-17, Devoxx, Antwerp, Belgium Nov 20-22, DOAG 2012, Nuremberg, Germany Dec 3-5, jDays, Göteborg, Sweden Dec 4-6, JavaOne Latin America, Sao Paolo, Brazil Feature InterviewMark Reinhold is Chief Architect of the Java Platform Group at Oracle, where he works on the Java Platform, Standard Edition, and OpenJDK. His past contributions to the platform include character-stream readers and writers, reference objects, shutdown hooks, the NIO high-performance I/O APIs, library generification, and service loaders. Mark was the lead engineer for the 1.2 and 5.0 releases and the specification lead for Java SE 6. He is currently leading the Jigsaw and JDK 7 Projects in the OpenJDK Community. Mark holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In this interview he discusses the future of Java Platform with regards to Jigsaw, Lambda, and Nashorn components as well as the OpenJDK community. What’s Cool QotD: Ubuntu 12.10 Release Notes on OpenJDK 7 New Lambda binary drop Development forest for Compact Profiles (JEP 161)

    Read the article

  • Future Air Plane – A new world

    - by Rekha
    For the first time in my life, I wished I had more number of years to live. The world has evolved from the cave man life to the man who is almost The Creator. When I was about 12 years old, I was taken to Chennai Planetarium for my school excursion. That day we were made to lie down in a dark room and the ceiling was full of stars and planets. All those were just videos but the day still stands in my mind. Same kind of experience in real is waiting for our future generations.Even though the English movies have gone beyond imaginations, we still have chances to bring those imaginations to real. You must be wondering why all these hype. Recently Airbus unveiled a news on transparent Airplane in 2050. This Airplane will have a body transparent to view the sky from all sides of the airplane when we are flying high above the grounds. And it will have all possible technologies under one roof that would give immense pleasure for the passengers. The journey would be an unforgettable one for each one of us. Image and News Credit: Daily Telegraph This article titled,Future Air Plane – A new world, was originally published at Tech Dreams. Grab our rss feed or fan us on Facebook to get updates from us.

    Read the article

  • Thoughts on web development architecture through integrating C++ in the future to a web application

    - by Holland
    I'm looking to build a website (it's actually going to be a commercial startup) I saw this question and it really shed some light on a few things that I was hoping to understand (kudos to the op). After seeing that, it would make sense that, unless the website were required to actually have millions of hits per day, it wouldn't be a viable solution to write a C++ backend on the server side. But this got me thinking. what if it in the (unlikely) events of the future, it does go that route? The problem is that, while I'm thinking of starting this all using .Net (in the beginning) just to get something quick and easy up without a lot of hassle (in terms of learning), and then moving towards something more Open Source (such as Python/Django or RoR) later to save money and to support OSS, I'm wondering IFF the website actually becomes big, will it be a good idea to integrate a C++ backend, and use Python ontop of C++ for a strong foundation, and then mitigate HTML/CSS/AJAX/etc ontop of the backend's foundation? I guess, what I'd like to know is that, given the circumstance, if this were to happen, would it be a proper approach in terms of architecture? I'd definitely be supporting MVC as that seems to be a great way to implement a website. All in all, would one consider this rational, or are there other alternatives? I like .Net, and I'd like to use it in the beginning, because I have much more experience with that than, say, Python or PHP, and I prefer it in general, but I really do want to support OSS in the future. I suppose the sentence I'm looking for is, "is this pragmatic?"

    Read the article

  • Podcast Show Notes: Are You Future Proof?

    - by Bob Rhubart
    On September 14, 2012 ZDNet blogger Joe McKendrick published Why IT is a Profession in Flux, a short article in which he makes the observation that "IT professionals are under considerable pressure to deliver more value to the business, versus being good at coding and testing and deploying and integrating." I forwarded that article to my list of Usual Suspects (the nearly 40 people who have participated in the podcast over the last 3 years), along with a suggestion that I wanted to put together a panel discussion to further explore the issue. This podcast is the result. As it happened, three of the people who responded to my query were in San Francisco for Oracle OpenWorld, as was I, so I seized the rare opportunity for a face to face conversation. The participants are all Oracle ACE Directors, as well as architects: Ron Batra, Director of Cloud Computing at AT&T Basheer Khan, Founder, President and CEO at Innowave Technology Ronald van Luttikhuizen, Managing Partner at Vennster. The Conversation Listen to Part 1 Future-Proofing: As powerful forces reshape enterprise IT, your IT and software development skills may not be enough. Listen to Part 2 Survival Strategy: Re-tooling one’s skill set to reflect changes in enterprise IT, including the knowledge to steer stakeholders around the hype to what’s truly valuable. Listen to Part 3 Writing on the Wall: Do the technological trends that are shaping enterprise IT pose any threat to basic software development roles? What opportunities do these changes represent? The entire conversation is also available in video format from the OTN YouTube Channel. Your Two Cents What are you doing to future-proof your IT career? Share your thoughts in the comments section.

    Read the article

  • How to solve my big communication issue and take care in future

    - by Rahul Mehta
    My company had a POC which was done by me,my senior ,my boss and our channel partner team 4 people and our company team done most of coding and first installation of the softwares of the POC was done by channel partner team, and documented the same thing, i had installed on our server, Our comapny team worked very hard. Now we are about to start second stage of POC. But today my boss told me that my senior and channel partner team have issue with me ,regarding my communication. So before considering me on this project they want to resolve this issue or not considered me . I agree i have less communications skills. and I don't ask any question till i need to any one , i prefer to ask on stackoverflow. But i don't know, how this issue is being arise ,i had done all the things they asked , replied to all email and talk on phone. I always obeyed them. I always told them what they asked. what should i do that these type of issue doesn't arrive in future. And now boss told me to prepare a script to talk with my senior to resolve the issue. what should i talk to my senior? I want to work on this project , but i don't want to do so much request to work on this project. How should and what should (Code Documentation , Research Material I done etc . what are docs neccessary for communication with team member )i communication with my team member in future so these kind of issue not arise.

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Declares the Future of ASP.NET is Web API

    - by sbwalker
    Sitting on a plane on my way home from Tech Ed 2012 in Orlando, I thought it would be a good time to jot down some key takeaways from this year’s conference. Some of these items I have known since the Microsoft MVP Summit which occurred in Redmond in late February ( but due to NDA restrictions I could not share them with the developer community at large ) and some of them are a result of insightful conversations with a wide variety of industry insiders and Microsoft employees at the conference. First, let’s travel back in time 4 years to the Microsoft MVP Summit in 2008. Microsoft was facing some heat from market newcomer Ruby on Rails and responded with a new web development framework of its own, ASP.NET MVC. At the Summit they estimated that MVC would only be applicable for ~10% of all new web development projects. Based on that prediction I questioned why they were investing such considerable resources for such a relative edge case, but my guess is that they felt it was an important edge case at the time as some of the more vocal .NET evangelists as well as some very high profile start-ups ( ie. Twitter ) had publicly announced their intent to use Rails. Microsoft made a lot of noise about MVC. In fact, they focused so much of their messaging and marketing hype around MVC that it appeared that WebForms was essentially dead. Yes, it may have been true that Microsoft continued to invest in WebForms, but from an outside perspective it really appeared that MVC was the only framework getting any real attention. As a result, MVC started to gain market share. An inside source at Microsoft told me that MVC usage has grown at a rate of about 5% per year and now sits at ~30%. Essentially by focusing so much marketing effort on MVC, Microsoft actually created a larger market demand for it.  This is because in the Microsoft ecosystem there is somewhat of a bandwagon mentality amongst developers. If Microsoft spends a lot of time talking about a specific technology, developers get the perception that it must be really important. So rather than choosing the right tool for the job, they often choose the tool with the most marketing hype and then try to sell it to the customer. In 2010, I blogged about the fact that MVC did not make any business sense for the DotNetNuke platform. This was because our ecosystem relied on third party extensions which were dependent on the WebForms model. If we migrated the core to MVC it would mean that all of the third party extensions would no longer be compatible, which would be an irresponsible business decision for us to make at the expense of our users and customers. However, this did not stop the debate from continuing to occur in our ecosystem. Clearly some developers had drunk Microsoft’s Kool-Aid about MVC and were of the mindset, to paraphrase an old Scottish saying, “If its not MVC, it’s crap”. Now, this is a rather ignorant position to take as most of the benefits of MVC can be achieved in WebForms with solid architecture and responsible coding practices. Clean separation of concerns, unit testing, and direct control over page output are all possible in the WebForms model – it just requires diligence and discipline. So over the past few years some horror stories have begun to bubble to the surface of software development projects focused on ground-up rewrites of web applications for the sole purpose of migrating from WebForms to MVC. These large scale rewrites were typically initiated by engineering teams with only a single argument driving the business decision, that Microsoft was promoting MVC as “the future”. These ill-fated rewrites offered no benefit to end users or customers and in fact resulted in a less stable, less scalable and more complicated systems – basically taking one step forward and two full steps back. A case in point is the announcement earlier this week that a popular open source .NET CMS provider has decided to pull the plug on their new MVC product which has been under active development for more than 18 months and revert back to WebForms. The availability of multiple server-side development models has deeply fragmented the Microsoft developer community. Some folks like to compare it to the age-old VB vs. C# language debate. However, the VB vs. C# language debate was ultimately more of a religious war because at least the two dominant programming languages were compatible with one another and could be used interchangeably. The issue with WebForms vs. MVC is much more challenging. This is because the messaging from Microsoft has positioned the two solutions as being incompatible with one another and as a result web developers feel like they are forced to choose one path or another. Yes, it is true that it has always been technically possible to use WebForms and MVC in the same project, but the tooling support has always made this feel “dirty”. The fragmentation has also made it difficult to attract newcomers as the perceived barrier to entry for learning ASP.NET has become higher. As a result many new software developers entering the market are gravitating to environments where the development model seems more simple and intuitive ( ie. PHP or Ruby ). At the same time that the Web Platform team was busy promoting ASP.NET MVC, the Microsoft Office team has been promoting Sharepoint as a platform for building internal enterprise web applications. Sharepoint has great penetration in the enterprise and over time has been enhanced with improved extensibility capabilities for software developers. But, like many other mature enterprise ASP.NET web applications, it is built on the WebForms development model. Similar to DotNetNuke, Sharepoint leverages a rich third party ecosystem for both generic web controls and more specialized WebParts – both of which rely on WebForms. So basically this resulted in a situation where the Web Platform group had headed off in one direction and the Office team had gone in another direction, and the end customer was stuck in the middle trying to figure out what to do with their existing investments in Microsoft technology. It really emphasized the perception that the left hand was not speaking to the right hand, as strategically speaking there did not seem to be any high level plan from Microsoft to ensure consistency and continuity across the different product lines. With the introduction of ASP.NET MVC, it also made some of the third party control vendors scratch their heads, and wonder what the heck Microsoft was thinking. The original value proposition of ASP.NET over Classic ASP was the ability for web developers to emulate the highly productive desktop development model by using abstract components for creating rich, interactive web interfaces. Web control vendors like Telerik, Infragistics, DevExpress, and ComponentArt had all built sizable businesses offering powerful user interface components to WebForms developers. And even after MVC was introduced these vendors continued to improve their products, offering greater productivity and a superior user experience via AJAX to what was possible in MVC. And since many developers were comfortable and satisfied with these third party solutions, the demand remained strong and the third party web control market continued to prosper despite the availability of MVC. While all of this was going on in the Microsoft ecosystem, there has also been a fundamental shift in the general software development industry. Driven by the explosion of Internet-enabled devices, the focus has now centered on service-oriented architecture (SOA). Service-oriented architecture is all about defining a public API for your product that any client can consume; whether it’s a native application running on a smart phone or tablet, a web browser taking advantage of HTML5 and Javascript, or a rich desktop application running on a PC. REST-based services which utilize the less verbose characteristics of JSON as a transport mechanism, have become the preferred approach over older, more bloated SOAP-based techniques. SOA also has the benefit of producing a cross-platform API, as every major technology stack is able to interact with standard REST-based web services. And for web applications, more and more developers are turning to robust Javascript libraries like JQuery and Knockout for browser-based client-side development techniques for calling web services and rendering content to end users. In fact, traditional server-side page rendering has largely fallen out of favor, resulting in decreased demand for server-side frameworks like Ruby on Rails, WebForms, and (gasp) MVC. In response to these new industry trends, Microsoft did what it always does – it immediately poured some resources into developing a solution which will ensure they remain relevant and competitive in the web space. This work culminated in a new framework which was branded as Web API. It is convention-based and designed to embrace native HTTP standards without copious layers of abstraction. This framework is designed to be the ultimate replacement for both the REST aspects of WCF and ASP.NET MVC Web Services. And since it was developed out of band with a dependency only on ASP.NET 4.0, it means that it can be used immediately in a variety of production scenarios. So at Tech Ed 2012 it was made abundantly clear in numerous sessions that Microsoft views Web API as the “Future of ASP.NET”. In fact, one Microsoft PM even went as far as to say that if we look 3-4 years into the future, that all ASP.NET web applications will be developed using the Web API approach. This is a fairly bold prediction and clearly telegraphs where Microsoft plans to allocate its resources going forward. Currently Web API is being delivered as part of the MVC4 package, but this is only temporary for the sake of convenience. It also sounds like there are still internal discussions going on in terms of how to brand the various aspects of ASP.NET going forward – perhaps the moniker of “ASP.NET Web Stack” coined a couple years ago by Scott Hanselman and utilized as part of the open source release of ASP.NET bits on Codeplex a few months back will eventually stick. Web API is being positioned as the unification of ASP.NET – the glue that is able to pull this fragmented mess back together again. The  “One ASP.NET” strategy will promote the use of all frameworks - WebForms, MVC, and Web API, even within the same web project. Basically the message is utilize the appropriate aspects of each framework to solve your business problems. Instead of navigating developers to a fork in the road, the plan is to educate them that “hybrid” applications are a great strategy for delivering solutions to customers. In addition, the service-oriented approach coupled with client-side development promoted by Web API can effectively be used in both WebForms and MVC applications. So this means it is also relevant to application platforms like DotNetNuke and Sharepoint, which means that it starts to create a unified development strategy across all ASP.NET product lines once again. And so what about MVC? There have actually been rumors floated that MVC has reached a stage of maturity where, similar to WebForms, it will be treated more as a maintenance product line going forward ( MVC4 may in fact be the last significant iteration of this framework ). This may sound alarming to some folks who have recently adopted MVC but it really shouldn’t, as both WebForms and MVC will continue to play a vital role in delivering solutions to customers. They will just not be the primary area where Microsoft is spending the majority of its R&D resources. That distinction will obviously go to Web API. And when the question comes up of why not enhance MVC to make it work with Web API, you must take a step back and look at this from the higher level to see that it really makes no sense. MVC is a server-side page compositing framework; whereas, Web API promotes client-side page compositing with a heavy focus on web services. In order to make MVC work well with Web API, would require a complete rewrite of MVC and at the end of the day, there would be no upgrade path for existing MVC applications. So it really does not make much business sense. So what does this have to do with DotNetNuke? Well, around 8-12 months ago we recognized the software industry trends towards web services and client-side development. We decided to utilize a “hybrid” model which would provide compatibility for existing modules while at the same time provide a bridge for developers who wanted to utilize more modern web techniques. Customers who like the productivity and familiarity of WebForms can continue to build custom modules using the traditional approach. However, in DotNetNuke 6.2 we also introduced a new Service Framework which is actually built on top of MVC2 ( we chose to leverage MVC because it had the most intuitive, light-weight REST implementation in the .NET stack ). The Services Framework allowed us to build some rich interactive features in DotNetNuke 6.2, including the Messaging and Notification Center and Activity Feed. But based on where we know Microsoft is heading, it makes sense for the next major version of DotNetNuke ( which is expected to be released in Q4 2012 ) to migrate from MVC2 to Web API. This will likely result in some breaking changes in the Services Framework but we feel it is the best approach for ensuring the platform remains highly modern and relevant. The fact that our development strategy is perfectly aligned with the “One ASP.NET” strategy from Microsoft means that our customers and developer community can be confident in their current and future investments in the DotNetNuke platform.

    Read the article

  • Designing for the future

    - by Dennis Vroegop
    User interfaces and user experience design is a fast moving field. It’s something that changes pretty quick: what feels fresh today will look outdated tomorrow. I remember the day I first got a beta version of Windows 95 and I felt swept away by the user interface of the OS. It felt so modern! If I look back now, it feels old. Well, it should: the design is 17 years old which is an eternity in our field. Of course, this is not limited to UI. Same goes for many industries. I want you to think back of the cars that amazed you when you were in your teens (if you are in your teens then this may not apply to you). Didn’t they feel like part of the future? Didn’t you think that this was the ultimate in designs? And aren’t those designs hopelessly outdated today (again, depending on your age, it may just be me)? Let’s review the Win95 design: And let’s compare that to Windows 7: There are so many differences here, I wouldn’t even know where to start explaining them. The general feeling however is one of more usability: studies have shown Windows 7 is much easier to understand for new users than the older versions of Windows did. Of course, experienced Windows users didn’t like it: people are usually afraid of changes and like to stick to what they know. But for new users this was a huge improvement. And that is what UX design is all about: make a product easier to use, with less training required and make users feel more productive. Still, there are areas where this doesn’t hold up. There are plenty examples of designs from the past that are still fresh today. But if you look closely at them, you’ll notice some subtle differences. This differences are what keep the designs fresh. A good example is the signs you’ll find on the road. They haven’t changed much over the years (otherwise people wouldn’t recognize them anymore) but they have been changing gradually to reflect changes in traffic. The same goes for computer interfaces. With each new product or version of a product, the UI and UX is changed gradually. Every now and then however, a bigger change is needed. Just think about the introduction of the Ribbon in Microsoft Office 2007: the whole UI was redesigned. A lot of old users (not in age, but in times of using older versions) didn’t like it a bit, but new users or casual users seem to be more efficient using the product. Which, of course, is exactly the reason behind the changes. I believe that a big engine behind the changes in User Experience design has been the web. In the old days (i.e. before the explosion of the internet) user interface design in Windows applications was limited to choosing the margins between your battleship gray buttons. When the web came along, and especially the web 2.0 where the browsers started to act more and more as application platforms, designers stepped in and made a huge impact. In the browser, they could do whatever they wanted. In the beginning this was limited to the darn blink tag but gradually people really started to think about UX. Even more so: the design of the UI and the whole experience was taken away from the developers and put into the hands of people who knew what they were doing: UX designers. This caused some problems. Everyone who has done a web project in the early 2000’s must have had the same experience: the designers give you a set of Photoshop files and tell you to translate it to HTML. Which, of course, is very hard to do. However, with new tooling and new standards this became much easier. The latest version of HTML and CSS has taken the responsibility for the design away from the developers and placed them in the capable hands of the designers. And that’s where that responsibility belongs, after all, I don’t want a designer to muck around in my c# code just as much as he or she doesn’t want me to poke in the sites style definitions. This change in responsibilities resulted in good looking but more important: better thought out user interfaces in websites. And when websites became more and more interactive, people started to expect the same sort of look and feel from their desktop applications. But that didn’t really happen. Most business applications still have that battleship gray look and feel. Ok, they may use a different color but we’re not talking colors here but usability. Now, you may not be able to read the Dutch captions, but even if you did you wouldn’t understand what was going on. At least, not when you first see it. You have to scan the screen, read all the labels, see how they are related to the other elements on the screen and then figure out what they do. If you’re an experienced user of this application however, this might be a good thing: you know what to do and you get all the information you need in one single screen. But for most applications this isn’t the case. A lot of people only use their computer for a limited time a day (a weird concept for me, but it happens) and need it to get something done and then get on with their lives. For them, a user interface experience like the above isn’t working. (disclaimer: I just picked a screenshot, I am not saying this is bad software but it is an example of about 95% of the Windows applications out there). For the knowledge worker, this isn’t a problem. They use one or two systems and they know exactly what they need to do to achieve their goal. They don’t want any clutter on their screen that distracts them from their task, they just want to be as efficient as possible. When they know the systems they are very productive. The point is, how long does it take to become productive? And: could they be even more productive if the UX was better? Are there things missing that they don’t know about? Are there better ways to achieve what they want to achieve? Also: could a system be designed in such a way that it is not only much more easy to work with but also less tiring? in the example above you need to switch between the keyboard and mouse a lot, something that we now know can be very tiring. The goal of most applications (being client apps or websites on any kind of device) is to provide information. Information is data that when given to the right people, on the right time, in the right place and when it is correct adds value for that person (please, remember that definition: I still hear the statement “the information was wrong” which doesn’t make sense: data can be wrong, information cannot be). So if a system provides data, how can we make sure the chances of becoming information is as high as possible? A good example of a well thought-out system that attempts this is the Zune client. It is a very good application, and I think the UX is much better than it’s main competitor iTunes. Have a look at both: On the left you see the iTunes screenshot, on the right the Zune. As you notice, the Zune screen has more images but less chrome (chrome being visuals not part of the data you want to show, i.e. edges around buttons). The whole thing is text oriented or image oriented, where that text or image is part of the information you need. What is important is big, what’s less important is smaller. Yet, everything you need to know at that point is present and your attention is drawn immediately to what you’re trying to achieve: information about music. You can easily switch between the content on your machine and content on your Zune player but clicking on the image of the player. But if you didn’t know that, you’d find out soon enough: the whole UX is designed in such a way that it invites you to play around. So sooner or later (probably sooner) you’d click on that image and you would see what it does. In the iTunes version it’s harder to find: the discoverability is a lot lower. For inexperienced people the Zune player feels much more natural than the iTunes player, and they get up to speed a lot faster. How does this all work? Why is this UX better? The answer lies in a project from Microsoft with the codename (it seems to be becoming the official name though) “Metro”. Metro is a design language, based on certain principles. When they thought about UX they took a good long look around them and went out in search of metaphors. And they found them. The team noticed that signage in streets, airports, roads, buildings and so on are usually very clear and very precise. These signs give you the information you need and nothing more. It’s simple, clearly understood and fast to understand. A good example are airport signs. Airports can be intimidating places, especially for the non-experienced traveler. In the early 1990’s Amsterdam Airport Schiphol decided to redesign all the signage to make the traveller feel less disoriented. They developed a set of guidelines for signs and implemented those. Soon, most airports around the world adopted these ideas and you see variations of the Dutch signs everywhere on the globe. The signs are text-oriented. Yes, there are icons explaining what it all means for the people who can’t read or don’t understand the language, but the basic sign language is text. It’s clear, it’s high-contrast and it’s easy to understand. One look at the sign and you know where to go. The only thing I don’t like is the green sign pointing to the emergency exit, but since this is the default style for emergency exits I understand why they did this. If you look at the Zune UI again, you’ll notice the similarities. Text oriented, little or no icons, clear usage of fonts and all the information you need. This design language has a set of principles: Clean, light, open and fast Content, not chrome Soulful and alive These are just a couple of the principles, you can read the whole philosophy behind Metro for Windows Phone 7 here. These ideas seem to work. I love my Windows Phone 7. It’s easy to use, it’s clear, there’s no clutter that I do not need. It works for me. And I noticed it works for a lot of other people as well, especially people who aren’t as proficient with computers as I am. You see these ideas in a lot other places. Corning, a manufacturer of glass, has made a video of possible usages of their products. It’s their glimpse into the future. You’ll notice that a lot of the UI in the screens look a lot like what Microsoft is doing with Metro (not coincidentally Corning is the supplier for the Gorilla glass display surface on the new SUR40 device (or Surface v2.0 as a lot of people call it)). The idea behind this vision is that data should be available everywhere where you it. Systems should be available at all times and data is presented in a clear and light manner so that you can turn that data into information. You don’t need a lot of fancy animations that only distract from the data. You want the data and you want it fast. Have a look at this truly inspiring video that made: This is what I believe the future will look like. Of course, not everything is possible, or even desirable. But it is a nice way to think about the future . I feel very strongly about designing applications in such a way that they add value to the user. Designing applications that turn data into information. Applications that make the user feel happy to use them. So… when are you going to drop the battleship-gray designs? Tags van Technorati: surface,design,windows phone 7,wp7,metro

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >