Theo Moore

I was looking for information on configuring the MMC, and found a great, handy article on how to maximize your usage of the MMC. Pretty cool.

Almost forgot I meant to post this until Sheri reminded me...

Nathan Fillion was asked about Mal Reynolds and when he lost his faith in God. She (the questioner) said it must have been during the battle of Serenity Valley. She wanted to know more about that.

Fillion seemed to slip into character when he answered this question. Just previously, he was laughing and funny...then he suddenly got very serious. It was almost like watching a transformation....

He said:

"Mal Reynolds did not lose his faith in God. He still believes very firmly in God, but he doesn't like him".

He then popped out of character....was a seriously cool moment.

I have been directed to "speed up" test development at my employer. Ok, I can do that some. However, it has been decided to abandon the process I've been using for the past few months and I have been directed to use "record and playback".

<sigh>

This is a nightmare waiting to happen, and it didn't take long.

My first test under the new "development" plan won't save anymore. As soon as I add anything else to it, the following pops up:

Wow, now that is a helpful message! I just need to remove all of the generals, and it should have fine.

I then tried to revert to the saved file, you know, the one that QTP thinks should work and I get:

In case you were curious, the file format is the one that QTP uses. So, it would appear it corrupted its own test files. Nice.....

Part of the way I develop test relies on less of the internal (read as: POS) QTP tools because they aren't as reliable as the manufacturer (Hp these days) would have you believe. Mine takes longer, but I don't have these issues.

Ah, well...let's see how much faster it is if I have to keep dealing with this....

Ok, who knew trying to get pics on the net could be such an adventure? I was intending to comment/rename these before posting them, but thanks to the lack of internet connectivity in the hotel, I didn't. So, anyway, here they are!

Enjoy!

IMPORTANT NOTE: SOME ARE DEFINITELY NSFW!!!

The hotel in which I am staying had some of the worst internet connectivity I've ever seen...oy. As a result, I've not been able to post on the Con. Thought I'd put some up today.

I have tons of pics (I think) of all kinds of great costumes. I'll get those up and linked soon. Sheri is very interested in the costuming, so we might work on something for next year in the Steampunk line. The Mal Reynolds outift I have looked great, I think, and was possibly the most accurate one I saw while I was there. Not being arrogant, just MO. Some guy did have the replica custom made boots, but they are like $500 online. I don't think I am ever going to get those. :-S

Saw some great bands while I was here. Very cool. Always like being exposed to new tunes and such. More on that later, maybe.

I saw the Firefly panel twice and it was excellent. The cast is very funny, and seem to genuinely appreciate their fans. I got to meet Nathan Fillion, Alan Tudyk, Jewel Statie, and Morena Baccarain. So nice, approachable and will to talk. The lines to see the cast and panels were incredible. HUGE lines. Fans filled the largest auditorium they have and turned people away. Amazing. Apparently, the fan base for Firefly increases every year rather than shirnks. Pretty cool.

Sheri and I have had a great time, and I expect we'll be back next year. She's even said she wants to stay in one of the hotels for the Con (read as: expensive ones) for convenience.

Not a whole lot going on today, so I expect we'll wander over there and just wander today. Maybe make a session, maybe not...eat some dinner and come back to the room to relax.

I am looking forward to next year already. :-)

This pic needs no comment....

 

A buddy of mine pointed out this figurine of the Joker from the most recent Batman...was thinking I'd like it.

 

Very, very cool....wonder if it comes with a pencil for the magic trick.....

I've begun work on a web-based game involving mostly a text interface (so far) involving some resource management, researching technology, unit design and combat...etc. All the things that support a pretty strenuous game engine yet is light on the interface. Should make for something fun, if a little tired. Leastways, that's my hope.

It is going to be Rogue-like in one way: lots of serious stuff going on under the hood with little in the way of interface. I intend it to be an ongoing game played over a set period of time, measured in days (or someone completes a victory condition). I have an abstract on it, but basically it is mixture of Syndicate (ye gods, how I loved that game...it's available on abandonware sites...or so I've heard) and Neuromancer/Bladerunner with a serious nod to the basics of the CIV type engine. It's my first project of this scope, and I know it will take me a long time to complete, but it should be tons of fun to build.

I am considering using SQL Server as my backend, but wondered if anyone had a better suggestion. The webserver will likely be doing some serious calculation around combat and such, so I suspect the db server isn't really much of a problem so long as it tuned well. The front-end will be written in ASP.Net (VB most likely, but might write some of it in C# for grins), so SQL Server seems an obvious choice.

Wish me luck!

I have been switching between VBScript, C#, and VB.Net all day today. Normally, I do this ok, but today has been unusually rough....

 

Basically, I have come to detest the "Set" statement in VBScript.

 

I cannot count the number of times I have forgotten this little keyword. Mostly, it's an issue with me changing code to use a reference type instead of a value type. Going back to change all the code to have a Set in front of it is making blood shoot out of my ears.....

Oy.....

Been poking about in Windows Powershell. It's pretty sharp. I like it, and it's powerful as heck, but I am having to learn how to add to my toolset. Seems like I don't need it every day, but when I do, it's just the thing.

Anyway, I'd read about arrays in PS for sometime without really thinking about something: PS flattens arrays. No multidimensional arrays at all. Which, of course, confused me, given the power of MD arrays. So, why would they do that?

Only thing I can think of is that PS creates standard interfaces around "things" so that the code plugs together smoothly. Remember how a lot of your Micronauts fit? They did because they had that standard interface (I know if you are reading this you probably knew that, but I wanted to work in a reference to Micronauts; I loved those toys as a kid...I had tons....). I was reading in one of the Apress books on the subject, and the author points out that collections and arrays are exactly the same way and have exactly the same interface. Ergo, the array must be flattened.

Leastways, that's my best guess.

We began our environment synchronization carefully. We carefully examined the differences between the environments, and documented them. We met with all the stakeholders/owner of the environments and everyone had input into how the synch would affect them and their work. We made adjustments to schedule and timeline to accommodate the disparate needs of the people with interests. Everyone nodded their heads in the same places, and rather than face it with fear, everyone seemed to have a calm confidence that, at worst, we'd adapt and overcome the problems.

Once the schedule was in place, we created an exact duplicate of the first environment (via virtualization, as this could be blown away and replaced easily if it goofed up) to be synched up. We left the other environments in place so we could continue business more or less as usual. Once the synch was complete and fully tested, we performed this on the actual environment, leaving the other environments untouched. We then moved on to and completed this sequentially on each environment until all were all happy. We realized it was our careful planning and schedule that kept us moving forward with few problems. When problems did pop up (they always do), we addressed them, but never, ever lost the ability to conduct our daily business......

And then I woke up, bolt upright in bed...and I cried...for it was only a dream. My vision merely a fairy tale fading fast, my mind tried desperately to cling to the shreds of happy calm I knew my dream self felt. I shook as I realized I was about to face yet another day of critical management and testing as every environment we have is dead and we have not conducted normal business for over two weeks.

My only comforting thought: it was not my (or my team's) decision to operate in a vacuum and try to synchronize the environments sans plan, timeline, or trial. Mine is not the neck in the noose for I am not the person who decided to shoot from the hip.

Here's hoping we can return to normal operation before too long....

I am bored with WoW.

OMFG, how wonderful it is to type that phrase. Let me do it again:

I am seriously bored with WoW.

I even added another descriptor to indicate the depth to which I am bored. How empowering, how liberating....

I like WoW a lot, but I confess I am tired of it. No, I am not tired of the "Go out and kill me 10 of <insert critter> and return with <insert insipid item>" type quests. I am not tired of the reputation reward approach (although I am a little tired of grinding for stuff). I realize these are just piece and parcel part of the MMORPG deal, and I don't mind it. It's as close to a pen and paper game as an automated system can really manage (not WoW specifically, but MMORPGs in general).

No, I am tired of the scenery and the same ol', same ol'. So, I pre-ordered Warhammer for $10 because it allows me access to the open beta. Open beta was believed to begin August 15th and the go live was September 18th...with a three day window for pre-order folks to play by themselves before general release day (assuming you liked the game well enough). I figured $10 for a month of something new was a good deal, and I might decide it was good enough to quit WoW.

Anything that sounds that good usually isn't, and this wasn't either.

Turns out we could register for the open beta on the 15th, but the files weren't available for download until the 18th....at which time it was announced the beta wouldn't start until September 7th. One month of beta just got whittled down to a week (once you consider the three day pre-start). Not such a good deal for your $10. I figure they aren't ready, and the open beta was pushed back to give them some time to work out some last minute kinks. Which means the open beta quality is not likely to be all that great. Combine that with the fact the beta is content restricted and level capped...not sounding too great. I wish I'd known a purchase those last two facts; I'd not have purchased it if I had. 'Course, it's only $10....but it's my $10.

What troubles me the most is that the game folks really seem to be considering keeping the same release date, which means the "release" will actually be "beta" for weeks to come. I already tolerated that in AoC for as long as I could and ultimately said good-bye to Conan's world.

Perhaps I'll stay with WoW a bit longer as I doubt Warhammer is going to be up on all cylinders before Lich King is released for WoW. I am hoping Warhammer is going to prove to be great, but I suspect it isn't for some time after release. Releases of MMORPGs are rarely pretty events <shudders thinking about AoC release>, but not having a good, serious beta in front of it only means it's going to be even worse. Let's hope I am wrong.

Just my two cents.

I finally got in to start my download of the Warhammer client for the open beta....

It is 10 GB and should take only 16 hours....oy.....

So there I was, trying out a multithreading example and stepping through the process. It was much like a lot of the same code I'd written to practice the methodology. Unfortunately, it wedged when I attempted to update a control from my new thread that was created in the main UI thread. I would expect this to be a problem, of course, but wasn't sure how to handle it (I think previous versions of .Net would have allowed me to update the control cross-thread). I look at the error and this is how it appears:

 

Normally, I don't pay attention to the troubleshooting tips because most of the time it takes me to a page that basically says "You goofed, dude; don't do that" rather than explain anything. My next step is usually to consult Google.

However, there was a link that looked pretty promising, and it is! It is one of the most practical MSDN articles I've read. It illustrates a bad call (like the one I had), and had two other versions of how to make the call the right way and even explained why it works. How cool is that?

So, now I've a very good grip on it and have added a very handy bit of coding to my arsenal. It's a good day. :-)

Oh, and this is my 300th post on ol' GWB. Hard to believe I ever had that much to say.

And it's my b-day, too. :-)

I know he posted this on his blog, but since my blog is hooked to my facebook page via RSS (and others), I wanted to publish a post to send it out to my web peeps. I can't explain it any better than he can himself, so I'll just link you to the article.