Parallel Development

Hi
Does anyone have any advice or guidelines on how you manager parallel development on a project in jdev 904 for a small team.
Any comments welcome
Thanks
Ian
[email protected]

Have a look at the thread "Best practice: team based development with JDeveloper and CVS?"
Best practice: team based development with JDeveloper and CVS?

Similar Messages

BW Upgrade and in parallel development

hi ,
I have some doubts abt in parallel development with bi upgrade.hope someone could clear my doubts on this.
Currently, I'm working on a development request that involves ODS/Cube/Infoobject change.All this are done in dev 3.5x.
Parallely, there is another bi team that's working on the upgrade activity which will upgrade this bw 3.5x to Bi7.0. Issue is that no freeze on development done during this upgrade activity. both development and upgrade is being carried out in parallel by 2 teams.
questions :
1.can anyone highlight the impact of this parallel activity
2.if i choose to stop the development work now temporarily, can i use the same transport request number which was generated in BW 3.5 dev and transport to new BI 7.0 production? or should i choose to recollect the objects again in BI 7.0 environment and continue development after the upgrade activity completed?
3.will i face any compatibility issue later if i stop the development work half way now?
4.Is there any other risk of in parallel dev and upgrade?
Hope someone could advice me on this.
Thank you.
Regards,
Maili
Edited by: Maili06 on Feb 10, 2011 9:51 AM

Infoproviders are version independent. While BW 7.x has different names for ODS (DSO) and additional features, there is no 'conversion' process per se at the infoprovider level. BW 7.x does provide new data transformation and data flow methodologies, but the BW 3.x methods are still functional in the BW 7.x environment.
However.. you will need to release and migrate your 3.x development transports before you perform the BASIS level conversion programs. You will not be able to 'keep them open'. So based on this factor alone, you will need to either
A) create and manage a dual development environment.
B) establish a development "Freeze" schedule that follows your overall development program.
When we converted from BW 3.5 to 7.0, we established a freeze.

Is parallel development possible?

Hi,
Is parallel development possible using Policy Studio?
Assume that there is a team of 5 developers working on multiple policies at the same time and perform deployments at frequent intervals - is this scenario possible?
Asking this as me and my team met with deployment issues as listed below:
1) My copy of a specific container would be different from the one on a team mate's one - as I started creating policies after the team mate started with his work
2) Once a team mate deployed his/her artefacts, I would lose my artefacts (which the team mate was not having) which I was having on my container
Regards,
Earnest A Thomas

Hi,
The short answer is no and in my opinion the biggest flaw with the API Server at the moment. I know for a fact this is something that is being worked for future releases but no idea when or exactly how it will work but it is a major update.
I work in a similar environment as you are describing and this is how I have implemented our process.
In our Dev environment we have one instance per developer, so each developer can work 100% independently. When the development is done and somewhat tested we export that sub-set of policies and check in to our version control system. We have one person responsible to deploy the exported policies into Test, which usually include updating some specific environment settings (updating URL's etc) and after this we do some regression testing.
One challenge is to be clear of what to export and not, for example LDAP connections. We have the LDAP connection already in test and we make sure this is not included in the Export but still there is a soft reference to this LDAP connection and this will work fine as long the connection is identical between the environments. This is best achieved if a "standard configuration" is made (including all settings for common flows as for example LDAP etc.) and that is being used as a base for the development environments. If there is a need to add common items, for example a new Root CA this should be done centrally and make sure all dev instances get the exact same update.
Cheers,
Stefan

Versioning and parallel development streams for worldwide SAP roll-out

Hi SDN folks,
My customer is in the process of a worldwide roll-out of SAP. They have a transport environment for ECC that looks like this:
D -
>    QA -
> R   -
>   P
We have SAP Charm installed and running in solution manager - to manage the creation of transports in the D system.
The problem we are facing is how to manage parallel development changes and configuration changes.
For example - if we have developers working on a change that is in test in the QA environment - and we hit a production emergency in P - we then need to make an emergency change to the P version (which would only be available in P and R) - and transport this change through to P - in the process - overwriting the changes that our developers are working on in the D and QA environments.
We also have the issue of objects for multiple countries being developed and configured in parallel - and so there will be version conflicts up the to the QA system as well.
Is there any kind of solution for the management of parallel development streams - and versioning - for all custom code / development objects and for configuration changes(other than introducing a second development system)?
Is there any kind of 3rd party product for SAP that helps to solve this issue?
Currently we are considering development freezes, manually renaming objects with versioning identifiers (will only work for some objects), manual backups of versions. - none of these seem to be a tidy universal solution, is there one?
Any help / directions you can offer will be appreciated,
many thanks,
Julian

Hi Julian,
Thanks for the clarification!
Managing production support and new development after go live is always a challenge. It can be addressed in many ways, but it is most important to create a set of rules and stick to the procedure. If you do not want a "second" landscape, you are going to have objects "overwritten" in the D and Q systems when you need to make a production fix -- as you must revert the object in D to the P version to make the fix. Even with a second landscape, objects will have to be merged somehow when a fix is promoted to production.
As I said above, what you can do is have your developers save their current development in released transports before making the production fix. This saves a version that must be merged with the fix, anyway. That is:
Object A is the produciton version and must be fixed.
Object A' is the current development version (unfinished) and is saved into a released transport request.
In D, Object A' is reverted to the A version and corrected for the production error, creating object A'' that is promoted to production.
Object A' and A'' are manually "merged" into A''' as the new current development version.
Yes, objects are overwritten with this method. However, you can always retrieve what has been overwritten since it has been saved in a released transport.
Another option is to bypass Q for production fixes. I.e. D -> R -> P. However, this invalidates the objects in Q until the merged version is created in D and transported to Q.
In any method you choose to do this -- dual development landscapes or not -- discipline and managment are a must.
Best Regards,
Matt

Best Practice of Parallel Development Lifecycles

Dear all,
Looking for some best practice information regarding the Parallel Development Lifecycles used either for the system upgrade or phased implementation. I need to understand the way how to change the object ownership while merge the two lifecycles into one production system.
Any help and/or direction is appreciated.
Thanks,
Joshua

Hi There are many levels involved in PDL .
Please have white papers on tehis
http://www.infoworld.com/pdf/whitepaper/SAPParallelDevelopmentManagementByNewmerix103107.pdf
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nwce10/helpdata/en/45/4b5d276e891192e10000000a1553f7/content.htm
http://www.agilejournal.com/news/397-mks-integrity-and-sap-linking-software-and-production-processes-at-continental-automotive-systems
All the best
nag

ChaRM:Parallel Developement

Hi Team,
I having the requirement like this. Currently we are having following system landscapes:
ECC system landscape: ED1--EQ1-EP1
APO system landscape: AD1-->AQ1->AP1
I am doing the MRP related configuration settings, (for example we consider object X) in ED1 & imported the transport into EQ1.
I am also doing the configuration settings in AD1 in the same object X (related to MRP related). if i import this transport request in AQ1, the changes which i have done EQ1 will get erased / affected which affects the business.
In such cases, if the consultant tries to modify the same object in the two different landscape (parallel development) which affects business process, the system should alert or block the second developemt till the first developement hits the production environment. How to activate this functioanlity in ChaRM?
Is it possible to achieve thro customization synchronizatiion? What is the main functionality of customization synchronizatiion?

Hi Khalil,
I have all the necessary settings in Sol Man & in satellite system as well.
Executed the ChaRM serveices in SE38 "/TMWFLOW/CONFIG_SERVICES"
Conflict Analysis: Cross-Project, Cross-Client (Cross system object lock active)
Object Reporting Active
Modification checks active
All the systems are i GREEN color in t.code "/n/tmwflow/cmsconf"
SCC4 settings in satellite systems are perfect. (Client Roles been set as Customizing,TEST & PRD). Apart from client role settings in SCC4, should i need do some other settings in SCC4 in the respective system?
Executed the report in satellite systems "TMW_CONTROL_PROJECT_LOCK" & activated the project lock in DEV,QA & PRD.
SMSY_SETUP is running properly in Sol Man.
But still the CSOL is NOT working Properly.
I have checked the CSOL scenario as below:
In DEV (satellite system), i have changed the configuration settings & stored in transport request & released the transport request thro Sol Man. Now i could able to create the one more transport request to the same customizing object in DEV (satelite system). I was expecting the error / warning message saying that, "Object already locked" (since the first tranport request is not reached production).
Is my understanding correct?
Please guide
Kumar

Parallel development with ClearCase and Jdev

I am looking for information on "best practices", howtos, etc for configuring a ClearCase VOB repository to support parallel development of J2EE applications/components using JDeveloper in a large development team.
In particular, I am not sure how to set up the code repository (AND JDeveloper) to deal with JDeveloper's project file structure and the various metadata that are created for each developer at the same time as you need to work transparently with an exisiting repository of Java components which have already been developed and are managed outside of JDeveloper and ADF.
Unless I have missed it...documentation seems to be a bit thin in this area so...
TIA for any help/advice/pointers
Jim

Mike.S wrote:
I'm searching for other peoples experience developing an application that could run with either postgres 8 or Oracle 10g.
The reason of course is that many of our customers don't have the money for Oracle, but we do want to use and RDBMS.
The logical thought is that as long as the database objects are the same, the application isn't going to be that different.The other logical thought is that if you don't use any Oracle specific features then customers who have paid money for Oracle will have just wasted that investment when it comes to running such an application.
So why bother with Oracle.
The simplest way to have a single code base is to develop for a single database, the cheapest lowest common denominator and just give the customer the database with the application.
If that is true that it would greatly help the development team since they would not have to have separate teams for each type of database.But it will not be a great help to the development team if they can only use functionality that is available on both databases and works the same way on both databases. It will be a really big hindrance to the development team, increase development time and lead to more code that needs to be written.
>
But before we start down that path we are trying to find out if anyone else is doing something similar, and what the overall experience has been.
I have seen several applications developed using this single code base for multiple database approach and they have all been inefficient when running on Oracle to the extent that you wish they had used a flat file and hadn't bothered with a database at all.

XIR3: Can Designer merge changes following a parallel development phase?

Can BO XIR3 merge designer changes in parallel development?
If I have a baseline universe ("Baseline") and then two seperate projects run concurrently (Project X and Project Y, both making changes to baseline) is it possible to then converge the changes of Project X and Project Y when it comes to releasing them?
In my scenario Project X will be released with "Baseline + Project X changes" in February, but then Project Y will need to go live in March. Project X and Project Y both start at the same time. I would like to merge "Project Y" changes into "Baseline + Project X changes" when Project Y development is complete.
Can this be done (ignoring manually making the changes all over again)?

Hi
I am afraid that the answer is no. You have to merge manually.
Regards,
Stratos

Duplicated query due to parallel development environment

We have a rather unpleasant situation in our BW environment after our upgrade to BI 7.0 and use of a parallel BW development machine during the upgrade.
Some of the queries seems to have multiple copies with the same technical name in production and development. The queries would have the same technical name but there are diffrent COMPUID generated when I see the RSZCOMPDIR table.
The problem is that when I make changes to the query and transport it to production, the production query with the same technical name but a different COMPUID does not get over writen. So the users don't see the fix. Unfortunately, we have a very large number of users and deleting the original queryin production is not an option. They all have their bookmarks and views etc. In production, I do see a duplicated query with same tech name but a different COMPUID same as what we have in development but not included in the roles. The added problem is that when I try to open the query with the technical name in query designer in production, it opens up the modified one but when I try to execute it from the same query designer, it executes the old one that is active.
In my opinion, a back transport would fix the problem as we'll have the same GUID query back in development and then it can be fixed or modified and transported wherever. Has anyone seen such problem and is there a cleaner solution?
Thanks for the help.
Bilal
Edited by: Bilal Ghayur on Aug 11, 2008 2:17 PM

Hi,
Execute the report 'ANALYZE_RSZ_TABLES' in your system where there are duplicate queries selecting the tables 'RSRREPDIR, RSZCOMPDIR and RSZELTDIR and the version 'A. This report will display all the incosistency with the reporting components in your system and hence will take sometime to fdisplay the output: 1-2 mins. In the report result, click on the 'Display' icon against 'Components with duplicated technical names.' under the heading 'Table RSZCOMPDIR'. You will now see the queries which have the same technical name but different COMPID. You then identify the query that you do not want & rename it to a different technical name by changing the entry under 'Rename query components...'.
I have used this report in 3.0B & 3.5.
Regards,
Shilpa

Development environment model

Hi All,
As the WebLogic server is not cheap (!), we were wondering what model you
used in your development environments? Obviously, it would be very
expensive for each developer to have their own copy installed on their local
machine, but how do you manage multiple developers working on the same
application with the same server on a central machine, possibly modifying
the same beans or beans used by others, and deploying them to the same
server? Also, problems could occur if a problem is introduced into a bean
used by others. Does anyone have a tried and true method for managing this
and keeping multiple developers from interfering with the work of others?
Thanks!!!
Elaine

I do not think you are going to find a solution to the problems presented by
parallel development of a project. That is simply just a fact of life I
think. But I think that there are things that you can do to mitigate
interference.
In our development environment, we have a central repository that keeps all
of the code. There are multiple source lines. Developers map the source
lines to their machines. For example, your commerce application might have
a production line and a development line. You would make bug fixes for your
production code in the production line while you made advanced development
changes in the other line. A release team would bundle of the development
line and make "releases" of the product/site.
As for development environments, each developer should be able to have a
copy of the developer seat for WebLogic on their box. In our situation,
developers synchronize against the code line regularly. This provides the
benefit of using a stable code line but also synchronizing up against others
changes on a regular basis.
Some other application server vendors have tried a different technique for
development environments. One of those is requiring that you have a central
"test server" that is shared by all of the developers instead of
environments for each developer. In theory, the sounds good. But in
practice, it can be a real nightmare.
I hope that this helps.
Thanks,
Michael
Michael Girdley
Product Manager, WebLogic Server & Express
BEA Systems Inc
"Elaine Herren" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Hi All,
As the WebLogic server is not cheap (!), we were wondering what model you
used in your development environments? Obviously, it would be very
expensive for each developer to have their own copy installed on theirlocal
machine, but how do you manage multiple developers working on the same
application with the same server on a central machine, possibly modifying
the same beans or beans used by others, and deploying them to the same
server? Also, problems could occur if a problem is introduced into a bean
used by others. Does anyone have a tried and true method for managingthis
and keeping multiple developers from interfering with the work of others?
Thanks!!!
Elaine

Parallel landscape during upgrade

Hello All,
We are upgrading from 4.7 to ECC6 EHP4. We are building a parallel landscape with copies of our existing DEV and QAS so that we can work on emergencies till all the systems in the current landscape are upgraded.
1. Can the parallel dev and qas system be included in the current transport landscape?
2. Will there be any issues if any transports are created in the parallel development system (which is a refresh copy of current DEV ) and imported in the DEV, QAS and PRD of the current landscape?
Any suggestions are appreciated.
Thanks
Deepak

Hi,
Yes. For example: If you modify some SAP program or objects for some correction in your 4.7 development system and then you will do the transport in your 4.7 PRD. Then this time might be the case come when number of SPDD and SPAU objects which will come in production system will be different then those in development system.
Then you have to do SPDD and SPAU for objects which did not come in development system directly in production.
Thanks
Sunny

Parallel developments - Version Management issue

Hi all,
My project is going into its enhancement phase and we intend to have a parallel development environment. Dev1 is for maintenance of the Production system, Dev2 for the new enhancement project.
Dev 2 is a client copy of the QA1 environment, as the data there is cleaner than Dev1. Eventually, once the enhancement has gone live, Dev 2 will be the overall Dev system.
My question: Version management is only stored in the source client, that is, Dev 1. How can we sync up the version management histories of Dev 1 and Dev 2. The client is concerned due to audit reasons.
Thanks!

Hi
Here the client doesnt want to use Me9f for output of the message. So the issue is how to get the output done from me21n and get the version updated from Version"0" to Version"1".
for this maintain the Message despatch time as 4 - Send immediately when saving the application Instead of 3 in the message condition record
This will process the message once the PO is relased & saved
Version managemnt is effective only if the existing messages are processed, if the message is not processed then version will not change in the PO.
Thanks & Regards
Kishore

Development Workflows

I'm working on a project that I design screens in Fireworks CS5 (FW), build interactions and animations in Catalyst CS5 (Cat) and finally hook to my server backend in Flash Builder 4 (FB).
Currently I've prototyped some quick states with a few screen transition animations. There are a states that I'll add more transitions to later, but for now I've pulled them into FB to hook to my services.
What I am trying to figure out is, what will my workflow and coordination with other devs on the project be. If we work on FB projects and build our app, but then later down the cycle we need to add animations to our states. How do we do this? Are we going to have to export from our FB back into Cat every time? Which would then require creating a new FB project then reconciling the differences between the 2 projects with FB "Compare With" feature?
How are others doing this?

With FC (CS5) and FB 4 there really isn't a simple (or easy) round-trip workflow, yet. The next versions (Burrito and Panini) are supporting a better process, but here is what we did for creating Adobe WorkflowLab.
The initial design was laid out in FC and then brought over to FB. As we continued development in FB and the designs changed, we would use FC as more of a converter then a design/dev tool. We would bring parts of the design that changed from Illustrator (our designer used this for all assets) into FC. We then converted the design as needed then we either opened Code view in FC and cut and pasted the generated content into FB; or we exported the library and then brought the library into FB. Once the library was in FB we then copy and paste the content into our FB project as needed.
As you can tell this is hardly an ideal workflow, but it was still significantly faster then older ways of doing design integration into Flex applications. One note about this process, we spent a lot of time upfront working on wireframes and creating a designer/developer "contract" to help the parallel development process from falling apart. If you are interested about this process then I would check out our series on PeachPit about how we planned, developed and deployed WorkflowLab using CS5: http://www.peachpit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1624607
Hope this helps a bit!
James

Future of Forum

I have some great ideas....reference the future of this particular forum ( I don't know about the others. According to Jerry, I'm glad I don't )
There are some FACTS that need to be agreed on to put my ideas forward...
FACT A ) Telephone help with Adobe is not perfect.
FACT B ) This forum is VERY helpful
If this is agreed.... the next step is to look at the evolution of the product, it's market share "desire ", and the potential of THIS forum.
As Adobe competes more with FCP and Avid for pro work and a full fledged workflow that delivers product that PAYS WELL ( eg. broadcast, movies in theaters, cable, etc ) it stands to reason the program will be used more and the market share will grow.
If the above is somewhat close to the truth there is a major change that MUST come to the forum here. It already is in motion but I don't wanna get ahead of myself here....
This forum is based on users ( USERS ) helping each other. It's only been fairly recently that adobe "employees" are taking more of an active role in improvement of the forum help ( by answering specific posts and making help files and videos ). Most of the help before that has been with some pioneers of the editing "scene".. specifically ( but obviously not giving credit to everyone who deserves it ) , Jeff, Harm, Bill, Colin, Jim, Ann, John, and many more .... Some are "community pros" ( whatever ) and some just have big sausages.
As the new versions of the program strive to compete with the mainstream movie making ( money paying ) market and actually start getting some foot in the door.... the complexity of the program increases and the whole idea of trying to appeal to every aspect of the market gets more difficult for Adobe. How can you program 4 million lines of code to deal with a "flip" camera, when you also have to write 4 million lines of code to deal with the new " Alexa" camera ? It's nearly impossible.
So Adobe has to make a choice at some point... and I think it's coming very soon. Focus on this... or focus on THAT.... and get off the "pot" so to speak.
Nobody wants to know about avisynth , frameserver, workarounds to deliver product ...and nobody wants problems in a workflow to make the product that needs to be delivered FAST with the best quality possible. Nobody wants to know about command line solutions to re-wrap a stupid asset just so Adobe will take it into the timeline...
But, and this is a very big BUT.... those people here in the forums ( some mentioned above ), who have historically kept providing answers and workarounds and good quality solutions to the people asking questions... deserve to be recognized in a very big way.
My personal feeling is that Adobe should get off the pot now and make that move.
Offer those people here ( community experts and the most helpful contributors ) a "job" with renumeration ( pay them ). Give them the real reward they deserve by saying " Join our team of help desk people " ( or whatever you call it ). Take care of them by training and so on as needed.
Filter everyone who signs up to the forum with their serial numbers of product..so that anyone without CS5 will not be able to POST in CS5. They get mssg " sorry, your version doesn't allow posts in this forum " .
Have a forum area for the more ' creative ' elements of editing questions to be dealt with ( like the lounge ) where everything is OK for posting regardless of version.
Pay Jeff, Colin, Jim, Harm, Ann, Bill, John, etc to work for Adobe ....to work the forums.
Otherwise, to be totally honest here....as I always am...this forum is going down the toilet.....
Why ? Because it is simply caught up with an identity crisis.... It doesn't know what it IS anymore. There is too much confusion ( as Colin pointed out recently ) and it's not going to get BETTER by itself. We contributers and users CANNOT solve YOUR ( ADOBE) problem for you by providing help with accurate information in an atmosphere of " users helping users "....because it is always going to end up with problems ( eg. someone wants to help but they dont have the right " version" ).
This is not the fault of users because this entire forum is based on users helping users.
This is the problem ADOBE needs to face and make a decision about.... or the forum becomes a dead end. You can't have a forum that has only 10 contributers that have had the editing program from version 1 to version 5.5 as they only one's capable of answering questions and expect customers coming here to get any real help quickly ( within a day ??? ...time is money ! ). These people ( contributors ) have their own lives and livings to make....so HIRE THEM.. ( is that so hard to figure out ? )
Likewise, if the forum becomes a place ( alternative to telephone support ) for help there is the problem of language barriers and so on , and probably a number of forums to fix that problem.. But I don't work for Adobe and won't spend much time on thinking about that particular problem... But maybe it's time to think about these things and " get off the pot " as they say....
This will always be a child's playground with abandoned "children" if Adobe doesnt take it seriously and pay for the help they have here...

What follow are some personal thoughts and observations.
FACT A ) Telephone help with Adobe is not perfect.
Unfortunately, this has been a fact, and for some time now. Adobe has been made aware of the deficiencies, and have stated that they are working hard to improve telephone support (not heard it mentioned directly, but would assume that this would also translate to some form of electronic correspondence too). I do not know how well this has progressed. Implementation of new policies in the corporate world can be very slow processes - think glacial. Still, having people with titles, such as CEO, Vice President of Marketing, etc., indicates an acknowledgement of issues, and a desire to solve those issue.
FACT B ) This forum is VERY helpful
Fortunately, this is also a fact. Even when C/S & T/S were "things of beauty" (yeah, I once ranked Adobe as all-time #2 on the good-scale), I advocated users going to the forum. Now, it was not really a forum, as we know it now, but a New Group on the NNTP Usenet. Along with several product News Groups, hosted by Adobe servers somewhere, there were a few product and general design News Groups, in the ALT and COMP hierarchies. That was where I got my start, so very, very long ago. While things were much more "free-wheeling," and especially in the ALT heirarchies, there were great contributors even back then. At one time, contributors like Chris Cox, Dr. Russell Brown and Mike The Curvemeister, and so many others , solved 1000's of users' problems, or answered their questions. Then things went to the HTTP world, and actually improved, IMHO. Adobe has always supported the forums (in whatever type they appeared), and though some will question Jive, I still think that there is vast corporate support, though maybe not all that it could (or perhaps - should) be.
As the new versions of the program strive to compete with the mainstream movie making ( money paying ) market and actually start getting some foot in the door.... the complexity of the program increases and the whole idea of trying to appeal to every aspect of the market gets more difficult for Adobe. How can you program 4 million lines of code to deal with a "flip" camera, when you also have to write 4 million lines of code to deal with the new " Alexa" camera ? It's nearly impossible.
I agree completely, and have framed many of my answers, such as those to the older, and very long MKV Thread. Adobe is in the business of making a profit through their software. There HAS to be a ROI. Defining what will, and what will not be supported is part of that equation. Sometimes it becomes very clear, like AVCHD, but sometimes it's just a crap-shoot. There are probably many cases, where the Adobe "crystal ball" let the developers down. We are never likely to know the value of resources that probably went into HD DVD, prior to the adoption of BD. I would guess that Adobe was having to play both sides of the street to some degree, and possibly lost some time and ground, as they waited for things to sort out. Still, I'd bet that there were parallel development teams at work to some degree.
Resources are limited. Time is money. Developers are not super-human, though some in corner offices might think otherwise. Decisions might have to be made, and some users, or potential users, might not get everything that they want. Adobe does a number of surveys, trying to clear up the images in those crystal balls, but in the end, have to project for ROI.
With greater concentration on the full-pro market, I feel that many consumer oriented development programs will just migrate down to PrElements, which is designed for a different market, than is PrPro, and especially recently.
Offer those people here ( community experts and the most helpful contributors ) a "job" with renumeration ( pay them ). Give them the real reward they deserve by saying " Join our team of help desk people " ( or whatever you call it ). Take care of them by training and so on as needed.
I cannot argue against this point, but will state that over the years, Adobe has provided me with many great products, and each has helped make me a lot of money. While not EVERY program released was perfect, most were very close. Some of the others were either improved upon and often incorporated into another product (think Streamline and Type Align here), and some were just dropped (think PageMill, and some others). So long as my Adobe products work well, and do most of what I want them to do, I will continue to try and help others get the same satisfaction, as i have derived. Being officially retired now, the $ is not a consideration. I do what I do out of respect for Adobe, and the great times that I have had with their products - still having that fun too!
I care far less about any remuneration, and more about support for all users of these products. For me, a couple of thank yous go a very long way now.
This is the problem ADOBE needs to face and make a decision about.... or the forum becomes a dead end. You can't have a forum that has only 10 contributers that have had the editing program from version 1 to version 5.5 as they only one's capable of answering questions and expect customers coming here to get any real help quickly ( within a day ??? ...time is money ! ). These people ( contributors ) have their own lives and livings to make....so HIRE THEM.. ( is that so hard to figure out ? )
I do see the benefit of splitting the forums by version number, just like splitting them out between PrPro, PrElements and even Encore. That has worked well, though there can be some overlap in threads, especially between PrPro & Encore.
In the Photoshop Forum, there is a split by platforms, and that has been proposed here. Some questions are PC, or Mac-specific, but many are more universal, or involving aesthetics, or workflow, and are not platform-specific. Though the Mac continget is growing, there was a fairly long time, when PrPro was only on the PC. For that reason, plus some others, there are more PC users here. Were the PrPro forum be split by platform, I think that it would be along time, before the number of Mac subscribers would grow to the point of really being as effective. In the cases where a question would not be 100% Mac-specific, they would likely not be answered nearly as quickly.
From time to time, I have wondered about splitting out the old Premiere from the CS4 & Earlier, as it once was, BUT I think we'd end up with a backwater forum, that no one would ever visit, and the few, still on Pr 6.5, etc., would NEVER get a reply.
I'm cool with things as they are. Any reservations that I had about a separate CS5 forum (now CS5 & CS5.5) were proved wrong. Shortly after that split, I retracted my concerns, as they were quickly shown to be moot.
This will always be a child's playground with abandoned "children" if Adobe doesnt take it seriously and pay for the help they have here...
To me, the very presence of Todd, Jeremy, and several other Adobe employees here, indicate that Adobe is not abondoning the "children." I see their presence as a sign of support by Adobe, and welcome it. Sometimes, I wish that they could drop by the CS4& Earlier forum, but it is not like they don't have anything else to do...
Thanks for sharing, and remember, the above are just my personal thoughts and observations. "Any resemblance... is purely coincidental."
Hunt

How to install Mac OS 10.1 on iBook G4 mid-2005

Hi. I have just bought a vintage copy of Mac OS 10.1 for my iBook G4, not realizing that I can't strictly speaking install the OS on the machine. I read that some people have done it, but I am running 10.4.11, and I was wondering how I can dual boot and install 10.1 on a different partition, as the earliest OS was 10.3 Panther. Thanks!
-jonasfromwa

Rather unlikely Puma 10.1.5 would be able to support booting a later model mid-2005 iBook G4 that shipped with Tiger 10.4.x -- As Puma was intended to run on G3 PPCs, that often would have booted in OS 9 by default. And used rather different firmware in specific hardware for the old PPC G3 to use OSX on vintage chips. A real headache zone. I'd rather have seen some more parallel development of OS 9.2.2... Almost as good as Tiger 10.4.11 as a fine OS.
I vaguely remember Puma as a 'vast improvement over the OS X Public Beta of Sept 2000' which some foolishly installed on their workstations.
Use older Vintage hardware with partitioned hard disk drives, and watch for those which supported FireWire (iMac400DV was a good one) because you could use an external hard disk drive. Maybe even boot clones, etc from there. With all the limitations on the early hardware that made first practical use of OS X nearly impossible, a newer machine at the other end won't support an antique operating system readily if at all. Not without writing some code; and there probably are firmware considerations beyond the scope of reason. Better to get the correct hardware for the vintage experience.
Makes me tired just thinking about it!
Good luck & happy computing!

Parallel Development

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for