Ron Minnich’s interview with On The Metal is great too: https://oxide.computer/blog/on-the-metal-3-ron-minnich/
I’ve been addicted to these podcasts lately. I started with the Johnathan Blow episode, but I’ve been working my way up from the bottom. Learning about both computing and the people involved has been really informative and entertaining, and that’s for someone who has never subscribed to a podcast series before. Bryan Cantrill is a surprisingly adept interviewer.
Agreed! Great guests, great interviewers. Don’t miss out on the show notes, they’re usually packed with a lot more supporting material.
I’ve been telling my family for several years about the impending collapse of the gigantic house of cards of modern software based on what I’ve seen. They don’t believe me.
The #1 thing we need to do is to do is apprentice and case-study based training of developers. Start training developers using case studies with real programs instead of just abstract ideas like “encapsulation” and having them write from scratch without having seen what production software looks like. Literate programming book such as Pharr and Humphreys’ amazing “Physically based rendering” are good steps in this direction.
http://www.pbr-book.org for those interested in following the referral.
Could you elaborate on what you mean by “collapse”? How would you expect the experience of writing or using software to be different afterwards?
I really wished my college days were spent more on building and less on learning about polymorphism and encapsulation.
That said, the author misses the point that we are in the middle of a huge boom where entire industries are just now looking around and saying, “How can we make our business more efficient with software?” Of course software is ideally supposed to ship bug free, of course Catalina shouldn’t have bugs, but at the end of the day we live in a world where user growth and utility drives value, not code quality.
Century old industries are just now coming online and trying to integrate software into their business models, so they likely are either going to make low quality software that solves immediate needs. Not all companies view software as a revenue center.
For most companies in the world software is just a way to lower costs. Not a money maker. Many of us are biased by the fact we work in tech and work on software products/projects that are money makers. Some of the companies in the post are giant tech companies.
Imagine the total lines of code count at any of the companies mentioned. It’s easily in the hundreds of millions or even billions. Of course there are examples of bad code!
I wonder if folks would have this same reaction if a developer license was $10 a year? Is it a purely financial decision or is it just that they’re being asked to quantify their hobby at all?
It’s not just the developer license; you have to:
To this first-world-living, employed, healthy programmer, the $100/year is an irrelevance. Stealing my hobby time to make me jump through banal hoops is not (to be clear: I would be more OK with doing this if it weren’t such a hassle; signature verification isn’t without its merits).
Yes. I haven’t owned a Mac since 2011, but I’m getting requests for a small open source project I haven’t really worked on since 2012 to be updated.
It’s no great tragedy that I probably won’t ever update it for Catalina, but it is a bit of a shame.
I have quite a few apps that will stop working in Catalina. I just don’t care enough; this MacBook Air will go in the collection room when 10.14 is no longer supported.