A curiosity from the eighties...

[Miguel Pebre Rodrigues]

A Prime curiosity:

https://cloudpt.pt/link/b77a489d-b530-4d18-a0b3-84d28aec64ad/Prime.jpg

-mpr

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <2c87e046-1dcc-42f0...@googlegroups.com>,

Miguel Pebre Rodrigues <miguel...@gmail.com> writes:
> A Prime curiosity:
>
> https://cloudpt.pt/link/b77a489d-b530-4d18-a0b3-84d28aec64ad/Prime.jpg
>

Mine are older. And say IBM on the edge. :-)

bill

--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bill...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>

[Dennis Boone]

> A Prime curiosity:
> https://cloudpt.pt/link/b77a489d-b530-4d18-a0b3-84d28aec64ad/Prime.jpg

Miguel,

Nice! This kind of ephemera is always fun to see.

De

[Dennis Boone]

> Mine are older. And say IBM on the edge. :-)

Ah, but which is less common? :)

De

[Mike Causer]

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 16:58:54 -0600
d...@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) wrote:

> Nice! This kind of ephemera is always fun to see.

OK, here's one that I guarantee IBM never used:-

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54731504@N04/8504501293/in/photostream



Mike

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <7bKdncSpGrzcBrfM...@giganews.com>,

d...@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) writes:
> > Mine are older. And say IBM on the edge. :-)
>
> Ah, but which is less common? :)

No flowcharting template is "common" today. Like much of the original
programming art flowcharting is no longer in vogue.

[Cydrome Leader]

Bill Gunshannon <bill...@cs.uofs.edu> wrote:
> In article <7bKdncSpGrzcBrfM...@giganews.com>,
> d...@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) writes:
>> > Mine are older. And say IBM on the edge. :-)
>>
>> Ah, but which is less common? :)
>
> No flowcharting template is "common" today. Like much of the original
> programming art flowcharting is no longer in vogue.

no flowcharting is why so much software sucks these days.

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <khdjdb$q53$3...@reader2.panix.com>,

You're preaching to the choir. I spent years trying to find out how
what passes as Software Engineering today is better than what we used
to do when I was a professional software developer. Doesn't matter
that we did a lot more deskwork and design and, yes, more contact with
the user than what they teach as SE today. As everyone knows newer
is always better. Thank you CMU and the SEI....

[Cydrome Leader]

Bill Gunshannon <bi...@server1.cs.uofs.edu> wrote:
> In article <khdjdb$q53$3...@reader2.panix.com>,
> Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> writes:
>> Bill Gunshannon <bill...@cs.uofs.edu> wrote:
>>> In article <7bKdncSpGrzcBrfM...@giganews.com>,
>>> d...@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) writes:
>>>> > Mine are older. And say IBM on the edge. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Ah, but which is less common? :)
>>>
>>> No flowcharting template is "common" today. Like much of the original
>>> programming art flowcharting is no longer in vogue.
>>
>> no flowcharting is why so much software sucks these days.
>>
>
> You're preaching to the choir. I spent years trying to find out how
> what passes as Software Engineering today is better than what we used
> to do when I was a professional software developer. Doesn't matter
> that we did a lot more deskwork and design and, yes, more contact with
> the user than what they teach as SE today. As everyone knows newer
> is always better. Thank you CMU and the SEI....

What whole "engineer" + computers stuff borders on fraud. I'm not sure how
it's even legal to say. I'm not aware of any states that license software
"engineers".

Just imagine the laughability factor of a SE putting their seal on
a project and signing off on it, and being liable for it failing.

[Shannon]

On 2013-03-08, Bill Gunshannon <bi...@server1.cs.uofs.edu> wrote:
> In article <khdjdb$q53$3...@reader2.panix.com>,
> Cydrome Leader <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> writes:
>> Bill Gunshannon <bill...@cs.uofs.edu> wrote:
>>> In article <7bKdncSpGrzcBrfM...@giganews.com>,
>>> d...@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) writes:
>>>> > Mine are older. And say IBM on the edge. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Ah, but which is less common? :)
>>>
>>> No flowcharting template is "common" today. Like much of the original
>>> programming art flowcharting is no longer in vogue.
>>
>> no flowcharting is why so much software sucks these days.
>>
>
> You're preaching to the choir. I spent years trying to find out how
> what passes as Software Engineering today is better than what we used
> to do when I was a professional software developer. Doesn't matter
> that we did a lot more deskwork and design and, yes, more contact with
> the user than what they teach as SE today. As everyone knows newer
> is always better. Thank you CMU and the SEI....

I would argue that part of the issue is that the contact with the user
is too much. What I means is, we used to talk to the user, to find out
what he needed, and he helped us do a lot of the things outside of our
domain, like maybe display and input screens for his particular
profession. But then you know how that worked.

The issue now is the user a far different beast:
- the user now decides how you will design it
- the user now tell you what to write it in
- the user tells you what it will run on, and keep in mind he often does
not know the difference between a mainframe and an iMac
- the user will dictate that you use C#, MondoDB, MySQL, ASP,
JavaScript, and a host of other acronyms, without any real understand
what the implications are
- the user can't even be counted on to even know his own domain, which
is among the worst of it.

Basically the users is designing the software and somehow, from the mess
that results, we have to code it.

It isn't always like that, I'm exaggerating, but it very often is just
like that and as a programmer I no longer typically have the authority
to fix the situation.


--
Where some they sell their dreams...