Search Results

Search found 8935 results on 358 pages for 'mad vs'.

Page 23/358 | < Previous Page | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >

• Canonicalization issue regarding academic URL vs. blog URL

  - by user5395

  I'm sorry if what I am about to write is long-winded. I only wish to be clear. I am an academic in the scientific community. I maintain a web site for my research, teaching, and other professional activities. Until recently, the content for this site was hosted in a directory on my university department's own server. The address is of the typical form (universityname).edu/~(myusername) I decided that I wanted to use WordPress in order to host and manage my page. So I set up a WordPress.com blog and then replaced the index.html file in (universityname).edu/~(myusername) with a new one consisting of a single frame, containing the WordPress.com blog. Now when a user visits (universityname).edu/~(myusername), he or she sees the blog instead. This has been pretty nice because, even when the user clicks on links between pages or posts in the blog, the only thing showing up in the address bar of the browser is www.(universityname).edu/~(myusername), because the blog is constrained to a frame. However, the effect of this change on the search side of things has not been so kind to me. Before, when someone searched for my name in Google, the first result was always (universityname).edu/~(myusername). This is the most desirable outcome, for professional reasons. (Having my academic URL come up first suggests that I am an accredited professional, and not just some crank with a blog!) But now, Google seems to have canonicalized my web presence under the blog's WordPress.com address. It has completely forgotten about my academic URL and considers the WordPress.com address to be the best address representing me on the web. Unfortunately, WordPress.com doesn't support the canonical tag, so I can't tell the blog to advertise itself as my academic URL in the header. (It doesn't seem to help at all that I have used the WordPress.com dashboard to turn on no-indexing of the blog.) One obvious solution would be to use the departmental server to host my content again, and use a local installation of the WordPress platform. For reasons beyond my control, the platform will not be deployed on the departmental server at this time. Another solution would be to use shared hosting with WordPress.org support, because the WordPress.org platform does support the canonical tag (albeit via a plug-in). But this seems to usually require purchasing a domain name and other fees, and there is no guarantee that Google will listen to the canonical tag (it might use whatever domain name I end up with instead). Is there a way I can more cleverly integrate the WordPress.com blog into a page hosted on my department's server? Is there some PHP code I can write to retrieve the blog's contents in a way that Google won't treat as a link / "perceive" the blog? Please note: I am a PHP novice at best. I just feel there should be a simpler solution to all this, within the constraints of what I have described above. Thanks!

  Read the article

• In SEO & SEM terms, use of a international domain vs a local domain

  - by Paddy

  In terms of SEO & SEM if I have a .com and a .co.uk. Would it be better to use the .com and park the .co.uk, If I am selling the product locally (in the uk) and later moving out into the international market? Will I struggle more to compete locally with regards to local searches and Google Adwords, if I make the .com as the primary domain? Does the parking of the .co.uk or the .com effect the relevance of a web domains search locally and internationally?

  Read the article

• BDD/TDD vs JAD?

  - by Jonathan Conway

  I've been proposing that my workplace implement Behavior-Driven-Development, by writing high-level specifications in a scenario format, and in such a way that one could imagine writing a test for it. I do know that working against testable specifications tends to increase developer productivity. And I can already think of several examples where this would be the case on our own project. However it's difficult to demonstrate the value of this to the business. This is because we already have a Joint Application Development (JAD) process in place, in which developers, management, user-experience and testers all get together to agree on a common set of requirements. So, they ask, why should developers work against the test-cases created by testers? These are for verification and are based on the higher-level specs created by the UX team, which the developers currently work off. This, they say, is sufficient for developers and there's no need to change how the specs are written. They seem to have a point. What is the actual benefit of BDD/TDD, if you already have a test-team who's test cases are fully compatible with the higher-level specs currently given to the developers?

  Read the article

• Akka react vs receive

  - by Will I Am

  I am reading my way through Akka tutorials, but I'd like to get my feet wet with a real-life scenario. I'd like to write both a connectionless UDP server (an echo/ping-pong service) and a TCP server (also an echo service, but it keeps the connection open after it replies). My first question is, is this a good experimental use case for Akka, or am I better served with more common paradigms like IOCP? Would you do something like this with Akka in production? Although I understand conceptually the difference between react() and receive(), I struggle to choose one or the other for the two models. In the UDP model, there is no concept of who the sender is on the server, once the pong is sent, so should I use receive()? In the TCP model, the connection is maintained on the server after the pong, so should I use react()? If someone could give me some guidance, and maybe an opinion on how you'd design these two use cases, it would take me a long way. I have found a number of examples, but they didn't have explanations as to why they chose the paradigms they did.

  Read the article

• GameState management hierarchical FSM vs stack based FSM

  - by user8363

  I'm reading a bit on Finite State Machines to handle game states (or screens). I would like to build a rather decent FSM that can handle multiple screens. e.g. while the game is running I want to be able to pop-up an ingame menu and when that happens the main screen must stop updating (the game is paused) but must still be visible in the background. However when I open an inventory pop-up the main screen must be visible and continue updating etc. I'm a bit confused about the difference in implementation and functionality between hierarchical FSM's and FSM's that handle a stack of states instead. Are they basically the same? Or are there important differences?

  Read the article

• Build one to throw away vs Second-system effect

  - by m3th0dman

  One one hand there is an advice that says "Build one to throw away". Only after finishing a software system and seeing the end product we realize what went wrong in the design phase and understand how we should have really done it. On the other hand there is the "second-system effect" which says that the second system of the same kind that is designed is usually worse than the first one; there are many features that did not fit in the first project and were pushed into the second version usually leading to overly complex and overly engineered. Isn't here some contradiction between these principles? What is the correct view over the problems and where is the border between these two? I believe that these "good practices" are were firstly promoted in the seminal book The Mythical Man-Month by Fred Brooks. I know that some of these issues are solved by Agile methodologies, but deep down, the problem is still the principles still stand; for example we would not make important design changes 3 sprints before going live.

  Read the article

• Corona SDK (Lua) vs Native Obj-C for iPhone only word puzzle type game [closed]

  - by dodgy_coder

  I am trying to decide on whether to use the Corona SDK & Lua versus native Objective-C to develop an iOS app. This will be the first game on any smartphone I have developed and so its not that ambitious - a single player word puzzle type game - something sort of like scrabble. The advantages of Corona I can see are: Lua is probably easier to learn than Obj-C (shorter learning curve) meaning a possibly quicker development time Possibility to port to Android once its finished Advantages of native Obj-C are: Access to all and latest features of iOS More / faster available libraries Has anyone made this decision before? Are there any major advantages or disadvantages I've missed or got wrong here? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Just Another Web Service (JAWS) vs SOA

  Over the last few years SOA has been a hot topic lending it to be abused by many that have no understanding of the concept. In my opinion, one of the largest issues facing SOA is the lack of understanding and experience implementing SOA by business and IT alike. I just recently deployed a new web services that is called by multiple service clients. Would you call this SOA because it is a web service that can be called by any requesting client? In my opinion, this is not SOA; instead it is Just Another Web Service (JAWS).  Just because a company creates a web service does not mean that they are using SOA, in fact it only means that they are using a web service. SOA is an architectural style that focuses on the design of systems based on the consumer and providers thorough the use of contracts.  With this approach SOA needs to be applied for the top down in order for it to reach its full potential. In the case of the web service, the service is just a small part of the entire system that is reusable and has the flexibility to change. In order for a company in this case to move towards SOA then they need to define business processes that can be shared through the use of reusable software and loose coupling. Once the company’s thought and development process change to address changes in this manner they can start to become more SOA.

  Read the article

• Subsumption architecture vs. perceptual control theory

  - by Yasir G.

  I'm a new person to AI field and I have to research and compare 2 different architectures for a thesis I'm writing. Before you scream (homework thread), I've been reading on these 2 topics only to find that I'm confusing myself more.. let me first start with stating briefly what I know so far. Subsumption is based on the fact that targets of a system are different in sophistication, thus that requires them to be added as layers, each layer can suppress (modify) the command of the layers below it, and there are inhibitors to stop signals from execution lets say. PCT stresses on the fact that there are nodes to handle environmental changes (negative feedback), so the inputs coming from an environment go through a comparator node and then an action is generated by that node, HPCT or (Hierarchical PCT) is based on nesting these cycles inside each other so a small cycle to avoid crashing would be nested in a more sophisticated cycle that targets a certain location for example. My questions, am I getting this the right way? am I missing any critical understanding about these 2 models? also any idea where I can find simplified explanations for each theory (so far been struggling trying to understand the papers from Google scholar :< ) /Y

  Read the article

• Switch vs Polymorphism when dealing with model and view

  - by Raphael Oliveira

  I can't figure out a better solution to my problem. I have a view controller that presents a list of elements. Those elements are models that can be an instance of B, C, D, etc and inherit from A. So in that view controller, each item should go to a different screen of the application and pass some data when the user select one of them. The two alternatives that comes to my mind are (please ignore the syntax, it is not a specific language) 1) switch (I know that sucks) //inside the view controller void onClickItem(int index) { A a = items.get(index); switch(a.type) { case b: B b = (B)a; go to screen X; x.v1 = b.v1; // fill X with b data x.v2 = b.v2; case c: go to screen Y; etc... } } 2) polymorphism //inside the view controller void onClickItem(int index) { A a = items.get(index); Screen s = new (a.getDestinationScreen()); //ignore the syntax s.v1 = a.v1; // fill s with information about A s.v2 = a.v2; show(s); } //inside B Class getDestinationScreen(void) { return Class(X); } //inside C Class getDestinationScreen(void) { return Class(Y); } My problem with solution 2 is that since B, C, D, etc are models, they shouldn't know about view related stuff. Or should they in that case?

  Read the article

• Linux Distro Switching: Pro vs. Con

  Linux users have a habit of changing distros faster than you can say Ubuntu. Does this practice hurt of help Linux's development?

  Read the article

• [News] L'analyseur de d?pendances de VS 2010

  Visual Studio 2010 RC sort dans les jours prochains. L'occasion pour Jason Zander de montrer sa fonctionnalit? pr?f?r?e, le graphe de d?pendances et ses points d'extensibilit? : "I?m guessing there is a good chance you didn?t wind up getting a fantastic set of documentation or architecture for some of those projects. (...) Generating a dependency graph with VS2010 Ultimate is easy using the Architecture, Generate Dependency Graph menu:". D?couvrez les graphes ...

  Read the article

• Default Parameters vs Method Overloading

  - by João Angelo

  With default parameters introduced in C# 4.0 one might be tempted to abandon the old approach of providing method overloads to simulate default parameters. However, you must take in consideration that both techniques are not interchangeable since they show different behaviors in certain scenarios. For me the most relevant difference is that default parameters are a compile time feature while method overloading is a runtime feature. To illustrate these concepts let’s take a look at a complete, although a bit long, example. What you need to retain from the example is that static method Foo uses method overloading while static method Bar uses C# 4.0 default parameters. static void CreateCallerAssembly(string name) { // Caller class - Invokes Example.Foo() and Example.Bar() string callerCode = String.Concat( "using System;", "public class Caller", "{", " public void Print()", " {", " Console.WriteLine(Example.Foo());", " Console.WriteLine(Example.Bar());", " }", "}"); var parameters = new CompilerParameters(new[] { "system.dll", "Common.dll" }, name); new CSharpCodeProvider().CompileAssemblyFromSource(parameters, callerCode); } static void Main() { // Example class - Foo uses overloading while Bar uses C# 4.0 default parameters string exampleCode = String.Concat( "using System;", "public class Example", "{{", " public static string Foo() {{ return Foo(\"{0}\"); }}", " public static string Foo(string key) {{ return \"FOO-\" + key; }}", " public static string Bar(string key = \"{0}\") {{ return \"BAR-\" + key; }}", "}}"); var compiler = new CSharpCodeProvider(); var parameters = new CompilerParameters(new[] { "system.dll" }, "Common.dll"); // Build Common.dll with default value of "V1" compiler.CompileAssemblyFromSource(parameters, String.Format(exampleCode, "V1")); // Caller1 built against Common.dll that uses a default of "V1" CreateCallerAssembly("Caller1.dll"); // Rebuild Common.dll with default value of "V2" compiler.CompileAssemblyFromSource(parameters, String.Format(exampleCode, "V2")); // Caller2 built against Common.dll that uses a default of "V2" CreateCallerAssembly("Caller2.dll"); dynamic caller1 = Assembly.LoadFrom("Caller1.dll").CreateInstance("Caller"); dynamic caller2 = Assembly.LoadFrom("Caller2.dll").CreateInstance("Caller"); Console.WriteLine("Caller1.dll:"); caller1.Print(); Console.WriteLine("Caller2.dll:"); caller2.Print(); } And if you run this code you will get the following output: // Caller1.dll: // FOO-V2 // BAR-V1 // Caller2.dll: // FOO-V2 // BAR-V2 You see that even though Caller1.dll runs against the current Common.dll assembly where method Bar defines a default value of “V2″ the output show us the default value defined at the time Caller1.dll compiled against the first version of Common.dll. This happens because the compiler will copy the current default value to each method call, much in the same way a constant value (const keyword) is copied to a calling assembly and changes to it’s value will only be reflected if you rebuild the calling assembly again. The use of default parameters is also discouraged by Microsoft in public API’s as stated in (CA1026: Default parameters should not be used) code analysis rule.

  Read the article

• CRM vs VRM

  - by David Dorf

  In a previous post, I discussed the potential power of combining social, interest, and location graphs in order to personalize marketing and shopping experiences for consumers.  Marketing companies have been trying to collect detailed information for that very purpose, a large majority of which comes from tracking people on the internet.  But their approaches stem from the one-way nature of traditional advertising.  With TV, radio, and magazines there is no opportunity to truly connect to customers, which has trained marketing companies to [covertly] collect data and segment customers into easily identifiable groups.  To a large extent, we think of this as CRM. But what if we turned this viewpoint upside-down to accommodate for the two-way nature of social media?  The notion of marketing as conversations was the basis for the Cluetrain, an early attempt at drawing attention to the fact that customers are actually unique humans.  A more practical implementation is Project VRM, which is a reverse CRM of sorts.  Instead of vendors managing their relationships with customers, customers manage their relationships with vendors. Your shopping experience is not really controlled by you; rather, its controlled by the retailer and advertisers.  And unfortunately, they typically don't give you a say in the matter.  Yes, they might tailor the content for "female age 25-35 interested in shoes" but that's not really the essence of you, is it?  A better approach is to the let consumers volunteer information about themselves.  And why wouldn't they if it means a better, more relevant shopping experience?  I'd gladly list out my likes and dislikes in exchange for getting rid of all those annoying cookies on my harddrive. I really like this diagram from Beyond SocialCRM as it captures the differences between CRM and VRM. The closest thing to VRM I can find is Buyosphere, a start-up that allows consumers to track their shopping history across many vendors, then share it appropriately.  Also, Amazon does a pretty good job allowing its customers to edit their profile, which includes everything you've ever purchased from Amazon.  You can mark items as gifts, or explicitly exclude them from their recommendation engine.  This is a win-win for both the consumer and retailer. So here is my plea to retailers: Instead of trying to infer my interests from snapshots of my day, please just ask me.  We'll both have a better experience in the long-run.

  Read the article

• Experience vs. versatility

  - by Florin Bombeanu

  Let's say a .NET programmer works at a company which provides software on demand, not as a product. The programmer works in WPF for a period of time and he/she invests lots of time in it. He/she get very good at WPF and Windows Forms and desktop development in general. But the company has to provide a web application now, so the developer has to learn MVC or Web Forms. He/she is not experienced in web development so he/she starts investing time in this new technology and in time they get good at it. But this time the company has to provide a Sharepoint solution, and so on. What is more important: Being very very good at a certain technology, Or be as versatile as possible knowing less in each technology but covering a greater area of expertise? Should the programmer keep studying and working in WPF until he/she reaches a guru level or is it a good thing that they had to learn other technologies as well? I agree with those of you who will say that when learning different technologies you will also learn things which are useful no matter the technology you're programming in. But eventually, when the programmer will want to change jobs, will it matter more that he/she knows some WPF, MVC or Sharepoint than the fact that he/she is insanely good at one of them? I would think the second one is more important since most companies are looking for a developer for a certain technology. I don't think there are many companies looking for technical know-it-all people. What do you think?

  Read the article

• TDD vs. Productivity

  - by Nairou

  In my current project (a game, in C++), I decided that I would use Test Driven Development 100% during development. In terms of code quality, this has been great. My code has never been so well designed or so bug-free. I don't cringe when viewing code I wrote a year ago at the start of the project, and I have gained a much better sense for how to structure things, not only to be more easily testable, but to be simpler to implement and use. However... it has been a year since I started the project. Granted, I can only work on it in my spare time, but TDD is still slowing me down considerably compared to what I'm used to. I read that the slower development speed gets better over time, and I definitely do think up tests a lot more easily than I used to, but I've been at it for a year now and I'm still working at a snail's pace. Each time I think about the next step that needs work, I have to stop every time and think about how I would write a test for it, to allow me to write the actual code. I'll sometimes get stuck for hours, knowing exactly what code I want to write, but not knowing how to break it down finely enough to fully cover it with tests. Other times, I'll quickly think up a dozen tests, and spend an hour writing tests to cover a tiny piece of real code that would have otherwise taken a few minutes to write. Or, after finishing the 50th test to cover a particular entity in the game and all aspects of it's creation and usage, I look at my to-do list and see the next entity to be coded, and cringe in horror at the thought of writing another 50 similar tests to get it implemented. It's gotten to the point that, looking over the progress of the last year, I'm considering abandoning TDD for the sake of "getting the damn project finished". However, giving up the code quality that came with it is not something I'm looking forward to. I'm afraid that if I stop writing tests, then I'll slip out of the habit of making the code so modular and testable. Am I perhaps doing something wrong to still be so slow at this? Are there alternatives that speed up productivity without completely losing the benefits? TAD? Less test coverage? How do other people survive TDD without killing all productivity and motivation?

  Read the article

• Animating DOM elements vs refreshing a single Canvas

  - by mgibsonbr

  A few years ago, when the HTML Canvas element was still kinda fresh, I wrote a small game in a rather "unusual" way: each game element had its own canvas, and frequently animated elements even had multiple canvases, one for each animation sprite. This way, the translation would be done by manipulating the DOM position of the canvases, while the sprite animation would consist of altering the visibility of the already drawn canvases. (z-indexes, of course, were the tricky part) It worked like a charm: even in IE6 with excanvas it showed a decent performance, and everything was rather consistent between browsers, including some smartphones. Now I'm thinking in writing a larger game engine in the same fashion, so I'm wondering whether it would be a good idea to do so in the current context (with all the advances in browsers and so on). I know I'm trading memory for time, so this needs to be customizable (even at runtime) for each machine the game will be running. But I believe using separate canvases would also help to avoid the game "freezing" on CPU spikes, since the translation would still happen even if the redraws lag for a while. Besides, the browsers' rendering engines are already optimized in may ways, so I'm guessing this scheme would also reduce the load on the CPU (in contrast to doing everything in JavaScript - specially the less optimized ones). It looks good in my head, but I'd like to hear the opinion of more experienced people before proceeding further. Is there any known drawback of doing this? I'm particulartly unexperienced in dealing with the GPU, so I wonder whether this "trick" would nullify any benefit of using a single, big canvas. Or maybe on modern devices it's overkill (though I'm skeptic about the claims that canvas+js - especially WebGL - will ever be a good alternative to native code). Any thoughts?

  Read the article

• Debian Stable vs Ubuntu LTS for Server?

  - by Kevin

  Quick question: Which is a better platform for a professional use server? Debian Stable or Ubuntu LTS? The third party software we plan to use, works on both. Which one is better on it own merits? Take into account things like the kernel (Ubuntu for example has its own custom kernel for servers), and other Ubuntu specific customizations. I keep switching back and forth, and I need to decide so I can recommend one or the other to a client. Right now, I think I am going to choose Debian Stable. Recently, I have had Ubuntu Server Edition 10.04.1 have a few strange issues... I have Ubuntu setup to do automatic updates via a simple script, and every few months or so, libapache2-mod-php5 gets removed because of conflicting packages... Thereby causing me to loose the php function of the web server. Debian Stable has not done anything like this.

  Read the article

• Remote Task Flow vs. WSRP Portlets

  - by Frank Nimphius

  Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} A remote task flow is bounded task flow that is deployed as a stand-alone Java EE application on a remote server with its URL Invoke property set to url-invoke-allowed. The remote task flow is accessed either from a direct browser GET request or, when called from another ADF application, through the task flow call activity. For more information about how to invoke remote task flows from a task flow call activity see chapter 15.6.4 How to Call a Bounded Task Flow Using a URL of the Oracle Fusion Middleware Fusion Developer's Guide for Oracle Application Development Framework at http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E23943_01/web.1111/b31974/taskflows_activities.htm#CHDJDJEF Compared to WRSP portlets, remote task flows in Oracle JDeveloper 11g R1 and R2 have a functional limitation in that they cannot be embedded as a region on a page but require the calling ADF application to navigate off to another application and page. The difference between a remote task flow call using the task flow call activity and a simple redirect to a remote Java EE application is that the remote task flow has a state token attached that allows to restore the state of the calling application upon task flow return. A use case for a remote task flow call activity is a "yellow page lookup" scenario in which different ADF applications use an remote task flow to lookup people, products or similar to return a selected value to the calling application. Note that remote task flow calls need to be performed from a bounded or unbounded top level task flow of the calling application. If called from a region (using the parent call activity) in a page, the region state is not recovered upon task flow return. ADF developers recently have identified remote task flows as an architecture pattern to partition their ADF applications into independently deployed Java EE applications. While this sounds like a desirable use of the remote task flow feature, it is not possible to achieve for as long as remote task flows don't render as an ADF region.

  Read the article

• Solo vs Team development and the consequences

  - by Mathieu

  Hi, I've been programming for a while on different languages. I never really studied that at school nor worked on a team of more than 2 (me included). Still, I've been a professional developper for over three years. Last year, I took over my first C# project and it ended up being fine. I can't help but think that because I learned and worked alone I must be missing some concepts/hints/edge. For those who've been solo developpers before being part of a team, can you share your experience? Did you realize you were missing something? Did you find it hard? Did you learn faster after? Thank you!

  Read the article

• web vs desktop? (php vs c++?)

  - by Dhaivat Pandya

  I need to write a simple file transfer mechanism (that isn't ftp). Firstly, it must have a GUI. Secondly, it must not be dropbox. Third, it may not use any paid libraries, and hopefully, it uses open source components. The question that came to my mind is, where is everyone moving, from desktop to web, or from web to desktop? Would it be more useful to be experienced in say, C++ than in PHP (or vice versa)?

  Read the article

• 'sudo su -' vs 'sudo -i' vs 'sudo /bin/bash' - when does it matter which is used, or does it matter at all?

  - by Paul

  When I'm doing something that requires root be typed in dozens of times in a row, I prefer to switch my session to a root session. In the various tutorials and instructions I have used on the Internet, I see sudo su, sudo su -, sudo -i and sudo /bin/bash being used to open a root session, but I'm not clear on the difference between these and when or if that difference matters. Can someone clear this up for me?

  Read the article

• Updates about Multidimensional vs Tabular #ssas #msbi

  - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)

  I recently read the blog post from James Serra Tabular model: Not ready for prime time? (read also the comments because there are discussions about a few points raised by James) and the following post from Christian Wade Multidimensional or Tabular. In the last 2 years I worked with many companies adopting Tabular in different scenarios and I agree with some of the points expressed by James in his post (especially about missing features in Tabular if compared to Multidimensional), but I strongly disagree in others. In general, Tabular is a good choice for a new project when: the development team does not have a good knowledge of Multidimensional and MDX (DAX is faster to learn, not so easy as it is sold by MS, but definitely easier than MDX) you don’t need calculations based on hierarchies (common in certain financial applications, but not so common as it could seem) there are important calculations based on distinct count measures there are complex calculations based on many-to-many relationships Until now, I never suggested to migrate an existing Multidimensional model to a Tabular one. There should be very important reasons for that, such as performance issues in distinct count and many-to-many relationships that cannot be easily solved by optimizing the Multidimensional model, but I still never encountered this scenario. I would say that in 80% of the new projects, you might use either Multidimensional or Tabular and the real difference is the time-to-market depending on the skills of the development team. So it’s not strange that who is used to Multidimensional is not moving to Tabular, not getting a particular benefit from the new model unless specific requirements exist. The recent DAXMD feature that allows using SharePoint Power View on Multidimensional is a really important one, even if I’d like having also Excel Power View enabled for this scenario (this should be just a question of time). Another scenario in which I’m seeing a growing adoption of Tabular is in companies that creates models for their product/service and do that by using XMLA or Tabular AMO 2012. I am used to call them ISVs, even if those providing services cannot be really defined in this way. These companies are facing the multitenancy challenge with Tabular and even if this is a niche market, I see some potential here, because adopting Tabular seems a much more natural choice than Multidimensional in those scenario where an analytical engine has to be embedded to deliver one of the features of a larger product/service delivered to customers. I’d like to see other feedbacks in the comments: tell your story of choosing between Tabular and Multidimensional in a BI project you started with SQL Server 2012, thanks!

  Read the article

• Custom Java Web Development vs Spreadsheet

  - by jacktrades

  Need some arguments why a small business should prefer a custom web developed solution using relational database (e.g. Java Servlet + MySQL) over standard Spreadsheet user programs like Excel. Specially now in these days that Office 365 is available in the cloud. As a Java programmer need good arguments to convince clients that this approach is better (if it really is) This is a generic situation, I understand that each case is different. Nevertheless answers so far has pinpointed right answers.

  Read the article

• Micro Focus Announces VS 2010 Support

  Includes tools for automated testing Test - Test automation - Programming - Commercial Services - E-Commerce Testing

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >