• Amodin (unregistered) in reply to brian

    It's patently ridiculous to refer to this as what the fuck. In your overzealousness to ridicule, you seem to have forgotten that an actual conversation took place while this diagram was being drawn, the diagram was referred to, elaborated upon, crossed out for emphasis and probably abandoned halfway through once the more pressing visual analogies had been established. I myself have paper all over my desk covered in numbers and such drawings, which are of little use to me right now, but were immensely helpful during a conversation with a colleague.

    While the VPs knowledge can be called into question, this diagram is not the basis for doing so.

    I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere today for your self-aggrandization.

     

    Let's not try to remember that the person that this person, already most likely versed in .NET, was very busy coding in .NET (We call that bold there a CLUE) and I'm going to guess didn't take the time out to listen to one verbal blabber come out of the V.P.'s mouth, and I quote "As she sat there, trying to write code in Visual Studio.NET, Bill hijacked her notepad and pen and started to explain what .NET was all about."

     

    People like that V.P. talk just to hear themselves think aloud to others who have no inclination, nor desire to listen.  That was just a situation to flex and 'unim'press upon her the thoughts of an underachiver, much like you who posted my first quote.

  • (cs) in reply to Amodin

     

    Sweet!  I needed a diagram for my requirements doc, this is so going in.

    Manager, reveal thyself, so we can start mailing royalty checks your way.

  • (cs) in reply to RyanLeeSchneider
    RyanLeeSchneider:

     

    Sweet!  I needed a diagram for my requirements doc, this is so going in.

    Manager, reveal thyself, so we can start mailing royalty checks your way.



    Yes, I am going to include this in my design documentation for my currenet project and see if anybody notices. I'm still trying to figure out what the UML diagrams are for "sh*tstorm" and "unthinkable mayhem."
  • BUZZ (unregistered)

    It looks like an overhead view of a high school cafeteria.  Notice how one student ate the meatloaf and died on a table, while the lunchroom lady continues to serve with reckless abandon.

  • (cs) in reply to BlackTigerX

    <font size="2">I think I once saw that drawn in yellow crayon at a restaurant.</font><font size="2">
    </font>

  • (cs) in reply to Gene Wirchenko

    Gene Wirchenko:
    Anonymous:
    Nitehawk:
    The stick figures are a nice touch. It also appears that the [smart client] is communicating to the (Perf Stat) via morse code.


    Stick-figures are a part of the UML-specification.

    And no, this is no joke.


    Though UML is.

    Sincerely,

    Gene Wirchenko

     

    We had a running joke in our software engineering class about UML.  Some team had failed to draw their actors in their use-case diagrams as stick figures, using boxes instead.  The teacher berates them for 5 minutes or so, explaining that UML is a language and we must use the syntax of that language, just like we must use the syntax of C when coding C.  We can't just pick and choose which syntax we want to use and which we want to change.

     

    This prompted us to warn each other, anytime we were drawing out a UML diagram, "Don't forget to use stick figures or the UML won't compile."

     

    ...yeah I know, you probably had to be there.

  • (cs) in reply to cconroy
    cconroy:
    <font size="2">I think I once saw that drawn in yellow crayon at a restaurant.</font><font size="2">
    </font>


    The choice of crayon and color is entirely dependent on the context and the discussion in question. If the placemats are black, yellow crayon is an obvious choice. Take your writing-implement-snobbery elsewhere.


    :d





  • Randolpho (unregistered) in reply to WTF Batman

    WTF Batman:
    Agreed. I just found it amusing that he's trying to explain the merits of .NET to a .NET developer! Heh.

    What really makes my day is when someone will forget that I'm the one who previously enlightened THEM on a given subject, and will try to inform ME of the self-same concept -- usually distorting it in accordance with the illustration above.

    Sometimes work really is fun.

    I have the feeling that this VP was a recent convert and was proselytizing. Recent converts tend "preach to the choir". :)

  • (cs) in reply to John Hensley
    Anonymous:
    In fairness to Bill, the WTF doesn't say anywhere that Anne is a .net developer (using VS.NET doesn't mean squat), and there's a surprising number of intelligent programmers (e.g. Joel Spolsky) who at some point thought they had .net all figured out but really had no clue.


    The word "using" in not in the original post, but this is "As she sat there, trying to write code in Visual Studio.NET".

    Sincerely,

    Gene Wirchenko
  • Cowboy Bob (unregistered) in reply to Gene Wirchenko
    Gene Wirchenko:
    Anonymous:
    Nitehawk:
    The stick figures are a nice touch. It also appears that the [smart client] is communicating to the (Perf Stat) via morse code.


    Stick-figures are a part of the UML-specification.

    And no, this is no joke.


    Though UML is.

    Sincerely,

    Gene Wirchenko



    Not necessarily. It depends on what you use it for. I use AndroMDA to generate Hibernate DAOs and Spring services from a UML diagram. It saves a whole bunch of time, and I have part of the documentation already done at the end.
  • (cs)

    I think I just forgot how to program in .net after looking at that...but I must use the stick figure the next time I have to make an application flow chart.

  • (cs) in reply to voodooc
    voodooc:
    The REAL wtf here is that they didn't use Visio.


    Visio?!?

    That is far too "techy" for managers - a *real* manager would have taken over her PC to create a brand new PowerPoint presentation. The other managers, upon seeing this creation, would have called for the entire development staff to attend meetings to gaze upon its beauty and heap praise upon the managers.

    The only difference if the person would have been a "system architect" would have been the inclusion of Visio.
  • (cs) in reply to jvancil
    jvancil:

    Anonymous:
    To be fair, drawings like that are just the visual component of the conversation they're being used to illustrate.  By nature they won't make much sense when separated from the spoken explanations and gestures being used.  I've drawn things when talking to colleagues that I had trouble puzzling out later on, but made perfect sense in context.

    It was obviously created by an automated Drawing Creation Tool...

    Argh! You should have put in a "Warning: funny post ahead" label. I almost spewed my drink over my keyboard, phone, and monitor.

  • John Hensley (unregistered) in reply to Gene Wirchenko
    Gene Wirchenko:
    The word "using" in not in the original post, but this is "As she sat there, trying to write code in Visual Studio.NET".

    Yes, and... ? There are bukus of programmers writing unmanaged code with VS.NET.

    It's funny in a "dude can't draw" way but not in the "lol management is dum" way that people want to make it.

  • Gene Dumbshitio (unregistered) in reply to SeekerDarksteel

    I just can't help but ponder what kind of confusion we'd have if everyone, like you, decided using stick figures to represent people in UML was dumb asn instead insisted upon using whatever visual aid they desired, from labeled boxes (which would look close to entities), some would decide to use a blob, while still others would use their artistic representation of a person that would look close to some funky animal.

    Yes, I really do wish people didn't use a standardized, agreed upon format and used all different forms that would require me to intepret them.

    Sincerely,
    Gene Dumbshitio

  • (cs) in reply to SeekerDarksteel

    SeekerDarksteel:
    "Don't forget to use stick figures or the UML won't compile."

    Clearly a case of thinking without the box.

  • Runtime Error (unregistered) in reply to Gene Dumbshitio
    Anonymous:
    I just can't help but ponder what kind of confusion we'd have if everyone, like you, decided using stick figures to represent people in UML was dumb asn instead insisted upon using whatever visual aid they desired, from labeled boxes (which would look close to entities), some would decide to use a blob, while still others would use their artistic representation of a person that would look close to some funky animal.

    Yes, I really do wish people didn't use a standardized, agreed upon format and used all different forms that would require me to intepret them.

    Sincerely,
    Gene Dumbshitio


    Personally I like to use the WTF logo guy for my UML diagrams.  I think its suitable for most IT projects.
  • (cs)

    I am making the switch from Java to .Net right now, thanks to Bill L. it just all makes sense. It's my potential, and their passion. Now I too can be a friend of Bill's.

  • maht (unregistered) in reply to John Hensley
    Anonymous:
    In fairness to Bill, the WTF doesn't say anywhere that Anne is a .net developer (using VS.NET doesn't mean squat), and there's a surprising number of intelligent programmers (e.g. Joel Spolsky) who at some point thought they had .net all figured out but really had no clue.



    here's another one : Miguel de Icaza


  • (cs) in reply to Runtime Error

    I wonder how many developers actually understand and use UML.

  • WTFer, WTFee, and WTF. (unregistered)

    The real WTF IS thedailywtf.

    you ever play the phone game?

    thx for playing.

  • (cs) in reply to Gene Wirchenko

    Gene Wirchenko:
    Anonymous:
    In fairness to Bill, the WTF doesn't say anywhere that Anne is a .net developer (using VS.NET doesn't mean squat), and there's a surprising number of intelligent programmers (e.g. Joel Spolsky) who at some point thought they had .net all figured out but really had no clue.


    The word "using" in not in the original post, but this is "As she sat there, trying to write code in Visual Studio.NET".

    To clarify, I meant "trying" as in the sense of "trying to do work while someone sits next to you and distracts you." Not, "trying to write code in a language you're incompetent in."

    I'll admit that I could have chosen a slightly less ambiguous diction -- but sheesh, you people are picky ;-).

  • Wodin (unregistered) in reply to BlackTigerX
    BlackTigerX:

    Anonymous:

    True enough. I wrote a Master's Thesis in CS with stick figures in it. No joke either.

    True enough... like in, barely true, that is almost false, but is not false, because is enough true?[:P]



    Green enough... like in, barely green, that is almost red, but is not red, because is enough green?[:P]

  • (cs) in reply to John Bigboote

    <font size="1" style="font-family: verdana;">

    John Bigboote:
    cconroy:
    I think I once saw that drawn in yellow crayon at a restaurant.



    The choice of crayon and color is entirely dependent on the context and the discussion in question. If the placemats are black, yellow crayon is an obvious choice. Take your writing-implement-snobbery elsewhere.



    <font size="2">Dear Mr. Bigbooty,

    The crayon may perhaps have been red; the meal in question was fraught with debates over the relative usefulness of various condiments and I find it difficult to recall the specifics.  </font>    </font><font size="1" style="font-family: verdana;"><font size="2">In your proposed scenario, m</font></font><font size="1" style="font-family: verdana;"><font size="2">y preferred writing implement would be a white-out pen, though I concede that an occasional yellow crayon highlight might be appropriate for certain subjects; 'tis a shame that most dining establishments these days suffer from pigmentally-challenged table coverings.  Ah well.

    Incidentally, the white-out pen is also ideal for having random women you encounter on the street sign a 16-lb. bowling ball which is handcuffed to your wrist during your bachelor party.  Or so I've heard.

    </font>    </font>
  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to BlackTigerX

    You do realize enough has more than one definition and that the usage in the phrase 'true enough' should be associated with a secondary definition, don't you?

  • John Hensley (unregistered) in reply to Alex Papadimoulis
    Alex Papadimoulis:
    To clarify, I meant "trying" as in the sense of "trying to do work while someone sits next to you and distracts you." Not, "trying to write code in a language you're incompetent in."

    oh sure, that was clear enough. But VS.NET isn't a language.
  • Wodin (unregistered) in reply to Gene Dumbshitio
    Anonymous:
    I just can't help but ponder what kind of confusion we'd have if everyone, like you, decided using stick figures to represent people in UML was dumb asn instead insisted upon using whatever visual aid they desired, from labeled boxes (which would look close to entities), some would decide to use a blob, while still others would use their artistic representation of a person that would look close to some funky animal.

    Yes, I really do wish people didn't use a standardized, agreed upon format and used all different forms that would require me to intepret them.

    Sincerely,
    Gene Dumbshitio


    How about using a Mr. Blobby instead of just any old blob?

    (What are the chances the forum software will do the right thing with that link?)
  • (cs) in reply to SeekerDarksteel
    SeekerDarksteel:

    Gene Wirchenko:
    Anonymous:
    Nitehawk:
    The stick figures are a nice touch. It also appears that the [smart client] is communicating to the (Perf Stat) via morse code.


    Stick-figures are a part of the UML-specification.

    And no, this is no joke.


    Though UML is.

    Sincerely,

    Gene Wirchenko

     

    We had a running joke in our software engineering class about UML.  Some team had failed to draw their actors in their use-case diagrams as stick figures, using boxes instead.  The teacher berates them for 5 minutes or so, explaining that UML is a language and we must use the syntax of that language, just like we must use the syntax of C when coding C.  We can't just pick and choose which syntax we want to use and which we want to change.

     

    This prompted us to warn each other, anytime we were drawing out a UML diagram, "Don't forget to use stick figures or the UML won't compile."

     

    ...yeah I know, you probably had to be there.

    Please don't make jokes like that because they are becoming true rather than funny. There are organizations out there with multi-million dollar hype-and-advertising budgets trying push UML and related tools to the point where it WILL compile.

    That way, you can get a senior architect (who hasn't coded since his Cobol days) to model the business process in UML and presto, your app is built deployed and running without needing any developers around. Got any changes to the process? No problem, redo the UML push a button and recompile it. Any problems? blame the person who pushed the button rather than the obsolete architect or than the manager who signed away half a million dollars on the UML Compiler. After all pushing the button is a simple task you can hire a junior to do and so it must be the fault of the junior person.

    Like the 17 year cicada, some new mutation of a "code generator" starts creeping over the country and laying waste to everything in its path. They all make the same promise, all fail for the same reasons, but because the name is different, people buy it. UML is just the latest name. Maybe I should try to sell this crap for millions of dollars.

    But if Gandalf can convince me that letting Gollum live is a good idea, I suppose I'll eventually decide that selling code generators is morally reprehensible as profitable as it may seem. </rant> 

  • eli (unregistered) in reply to ammoQ
    ammoQ:


    In the past years, ".net" meant two things for Microsoft. One is the .net we developers know - VB.net, C#, IL and stuff. The technology some people might call "Java meets Delphi".


    You mean JavaBuilder? Sniffle, I miss Borland.
    I was at a Borland trade show party shortly before Dale Fuller resigned. Fuller was totally trashed and was air guitaring with the band. I think he knew it was over.

    eli
  • (cs) in reply to OneFactor
    OneFactor:

    Please don't make jokes like that because they are becoming true rather than funny. There are organizations out there with multi-million dollar hype-and-advertising budgets trying push UML and related tools to the point where it WILL compile.


    Use case diagrams containt almost no information at all, so they probably compile to comments. Using boxes instead of stick men compiles to misspelled comments.


    That way, you can get a senior architect (who hasn't coded since his Cobol days) to model the business process in UML and presto, your app is built deployed and running without needing any developers around. Got any changes to the process? No problem, redo the UML push a button and recompile it. Any problems? blame the person who pushed the button rather than the obsolete architect or than the manager who signed away half a million dollars on the UML Compiler. After all pushing the button is a simple task you can hire a junior to do and so it must be the fault of the junior person.



    Yeah, it's always funny to see how people believe the inherent complexity of software development suddenly vanishes once you draw boxes^h^h^h^h^h blobs instead of writing code. The "CASE tool" promise is at least 20 years old and still unfulfilled.
  • geewj (unregistered) in reply to lowmagnet

    This is why the .NET edition of Pictionary was a flop.

  • (cs) in reply to eli
    Anonymous:
    ammoQ:


    In the past years, ".net" meant two things for Microsoft. One is the .net we developers know - VB.net, C#, IL and stuff. The technology some people might call "Java meets Delphi".


    You mean JavaBuilder? Sniffle, I miss Borland.
    I was at a Borland trade show party shortly before Dale Fuller resigned. Fuller was totally trashed and was air guitaring with the band. I think he knew it was over.

    eli


    I guess Borland is having a difficult time, considering all those free (as in beer) IDEs on the market. Even MS gives away the express editions VS2005 for free...
  • Farmer Green (unregistered)

    There ain't no WTF in that there scribble.  Maybe the situation was annoying, maybe the VP was stupid.  That would be for Anne to claim.

    Yes, office design is often inefficient.

    Yes, there are managers who waste staff time.

    But I am here to tell you that looking at that diagram and making the assumptive and stupid statements most of you have made IS the WTF.

  • plizak (unregistered) in reply to forwardtech

    I mostly do numerical analysis stuff, and have never touched on .NET.

    As in never, ever.

    Can someone give me a link to a good outline on what is so powerful about it?

    Thanks,
    plizak

  • (cs) in reply to CSI Pat
    Anonymous:
    This is clearly a crime scene. Just look to the right of the SmartClient [:P]

    Presumably the body is a not-so-smart VP?
  • jones (unregistered)

    now what i want to know is how the hell the VP survived hijacking a developers pad and pen?
    i hope she quit on the spot,  that's worse than hijacking her diary.

  • manman (unregistered) in reply to plizak
    Anonymous:

    I mostly do numerical analysis stuff, and have never touched on .NET.

    As in never, ever.

    Can someone give me a link to a good outline on what is so powerful about it?

    Thanks,
    plizak



    Here is a basic over of it.
  • (cs) in reply to manman
    Anonymous:
    Anonymous:
    I mostly do numerical analysis stuff, and have never touched on .NET.

    As in never, ever.

    Can someone give me a link to a good outline on what is so powerful about it?


    Here is a basic over of it.


    Good joke.  You caught me.

    I was tempted to answer the question with "No."

    Sincerely,

    Gene Wirchenko

  • DrDoom (unregistered) in reply to Satanicpuppy

    Satanicpuppy:
    All I know is, if I try to release a version 1.1..1.21.1 of any piece of software, I want someone to slap me.

    First of all, you should release such versions of code only in large projects. It makes perfects sense to release an update of your file and label it 1.1. (software version)1. (developer/group ID) 21.(file ID) 1 (release). How else are you going to track it?

    <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p> </o:p>

    Second, I don’t believe there was any misunderstanding between n-tier and smart clients. They are both recommended strategies for best practice programming for .NET for BEFO applications.

    <o:p> </o:p>

    The last point was mentioned many times. IT is just a support diagram. Just because it was not done in Visio like someone proposed was because it was done of the fly.

    <o:p> </o:p>

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with this.

     

  • (cs)

    I like the box that has "Com Data, Uh." written in it.
    When I saw this I said "Uh" also.

  • (cs)

    This looks like a typical three-man front, stack-left defense ( left half ) to stop the double hand-off pitch right offense ( right half ).

    In the diagram, the left END ( page-bottom ) is gonna go long, while the right side fakes momentum to the right, protecting N-TIER to setup for the cross-field toss.

    UML has many purposes. Touchdown!

  • (cs)

    I think we missed the most obvious WTF in the whole thing:  her name is "A. Wiggler?"

    It is SO not "A. Wiggler."  Please, let it not be "A. Wiggler."

  • David Koontz (unregistered)

    Mine didn’t come from a VP from the team lead.  His explanation was only marginally much more enlightening than the one Anne got.

    http://www.koontzfamily.org/david/blog/?p=185

  • (cs)

    What the hell is that?  [:|]

  • (cs) in reply to David Koontz
    Anonymous:
    Mine didn’t come from a VP from the team lead.  His explanation was only marginally much more enlightening than the one Anne got.

    http://www.koontzfamily.org/david/blog/?p=185


    I like "business foos".

    Sincerely,

    Gene Wirchenko

  • (cs) in reply to OneFactor
    OneFactor:
    WTF Batman:
    pjsson:

    Anonymous:

    Stick-figures are a part of the UML-specification.
    And no, this is no joke.

    My former boss invented the stick-figures in UML. And this is also not a joke, I used to work for this guy. The difference between my boss and the one bothering <FONT color=#000000>Anne Wiggler is</FONT> that mine got rich from his stick-figures when Rational bought his company.



    Ugh. The Rational mentioned in that article isn't the one responsible for the atrocity that is ClearCase, is it?

    I just hope this doesn't begin a whole line of UML WTF's...

    Actually, that might be interesting.

  • (cs) in reply to WTF Batman
    WTF Batman:
    Sometimes work really is fun.
    And some days you just feel like bursting into the office in fatigues, brandishing a nine and capping all those executives in 30 seconds or less.
  • (cs) in reply to pjsson
    pjsson:
    ...The difference between my boss and the one bothering <font color="#000000">Anne Wiggler is</font> that mine got rich from his stick-figures when Rational bought his company.
    <font size="5">I</font> think you misspelled "six figures?"

  • Your Name (unregistered) in reply to BlackTigerX
    BlackTigerX:

    Anonymous:

    True enough. I wrote a Master's Thesis in CS with stick figures in it. No joke either.

    True enough... like in, barely true, that is almost false, but is not false, because is enough true?[:P]



    In pseudocode, "true enough" is the same as "True, or go behind the dumpster and shoot yourself in the head." Hope this helps.

  • (cs)

    Ok you can buy the source for 50.000 Eur or take this drawing.
    Its all we have.

Leave a comment on “Drive-By Architecture”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article