Brian Silberbauer wrote:
> By client I meant IT department type clients
I stand by my point. Back in the dark ages when I was involved in
making such decisions and advising IT departments on tools, process,
teams, etc., I still had the clear objective to make the process IDE
neutral so that different developers could choose the tools they prefer
best. I still believe this to be a good objective; a development
manager mandating "All developers will use X" smacks of laziness,
insecurity or stupidity. (In which case my sincerest advice is "Run
Away!" (picture large wooden rabbit flying over castle wall...))
> I think as java developers we are used to alternatives (in terms of
> libraries, OS and tools) and that makes as more agile and fear change
> less.
Its not fear of change, but that I simply can't be bothered to learn
another tool's annoying little differences. As you say, they're all
pretty good by now. What kept me away from IDEs for many years was
/exactly/ the idea/attitude/philosophy that "You have to learn the Funny
Little Ways that this tools expects you to work." Well ${bother} that.
Tools are meant to work MY way, not the other way around. Good tools
stay OUT of your way/face. (I know, I know; it's not a perfect world,
but we're setting a target to aim for, here.)
--
mike morris :: mikro2nd (at) gmail (dot) com
http://mikro2nd.net/
http://mikro2nd.net/blog/planb/
http://mikro2nd.net/blog/mike/
-- A day without chillies is a day wasted --
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"CTJUG Forum" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/CTJUG-Forum
For the ctjug home page see http://www.ctjug.org.za
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
