<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Startrip Enterprise Architects</title>
	<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060320/3058/</link>
	<description>Technology, music, video, art, news, reviews and muse on the web</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:52:02 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Can anybody else C through the Windows any more? -- Chip&#8217;s Quips</title>
		<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060320/3058/#comment-105818</link>
		<author>Can anybody else C through the Windows any more? -- Chip&#8217;s Quips</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 May 2006 17:47:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060320/3058/#comment-105818</guid>
		<description>[...] A couple of weeks ago, TDavid made some fine remarks about how simple most of today&#8217;s programming is, despite the &#8220;enterprise&#8221; hype that depicts it as exceedingly complex. He contrasted web and desktop programming with low-level, close-to-the-metal development that truly is difficult. Well, lately I&#8217;ve acquired a fresh reminder of how insanely complicated programming Windows in ANSI C at the Win32 API level can be. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] A couple of weeks ago, TDavid made some fine remarks about how simple most of today&#8217;s programming is, despite the &#8220;enterprise&#8221; hype that depicts it as exceedingly complex. He contrasted web and desktop programming with low-level, close-to-the-metal development that truly is difficult. Well, lately I&#8217;ve acquired a fresh reminder of how insanely complicated programming Windows in ANSI C at the Win32 API level can be. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sterling Camden</title>
		<link>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060320/3058/#comment-60461</link>
		<author>Sterling Camden</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 21:34:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060320/3058/#comment-60461</guid>
		<description>Yes, I agree.  I am constantly amazed at how easy it is to become proficient in most programming arenas with only a few days of research and playing around -- and at how many months some companies spend *not* tackling new projects because they are shaking in their boots over having to learn new technology.

Among the classes of "difficult" programming I would add some bridge programming.  Constructing interfaces between software systems that are unfriendly towards such a match often involves a huge amount of creativity and problem-solving, not to mention feeling like you need a shower at the end of the day to wash off all the legacy spaghetti code.

MS has definitely sought out the Enterprise market, methinks mostly to counter Oracle.  But lately they have made some overtures towards the lone developer.  Witness the "free" versions of SQL Server and Visual Studio forthcoming.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I agree.  I am constantly amazed at how easy it is to become proficient in most programming arenas with only a few days of research and playing around &#8212; and at how many months some companies spend *not* tackling new projects because they are shaking in their boots over having to learn new technology.</p>
<p>Among the classes of &#8220;difficult&#8221; programming I would add some bridge programming.  Constructing interfaces between software systems that are unfriendly towards such a match often involves a huge amount of creativity and problem-solving, not to mention feeling like you need a shower at the end of the day to wash off all the legacy spaghetti code.</p>
<p>MS has definitely sought out the Enterprise market, methinks mostly to counter Oracle.  But lately they have made some overtures towards the lone developer.  Witness the &#8220;free&#8221; versions of SQL Server and Visual Studio forthcoming.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
