Thanks to amazon.com and the magic of ebooks, I spent most of the last day reading Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. (unlike yesterday, I now know that Da Vinci is not spelled DaVinci).  For the ten people out there who've not read it or been told what it contains, consider this a spoiler alert.

Overall, I liked the book.  It was adventurous, pseudo intellectual, and generally playful.  One of the main points, however, struck a nerve.  I speak, of course, about the sacred feminine so often referred to in the text.  First, let me state what I understand to be the author's point, then I'll state what my issues are based on that understanding.

The Priory believe in the sanctity of women, their innate ability to produce life.  They exult them, as did many religions prior to Christianity, as goddesses.  They believe that man's (the gender, not all humankind) ability to commune with Deity happens only via woman.  In short, woman is divine and man partakes of that divinity via union with woman.

The reason that I take issue with this line of thought is this - despite the numerous overtones and undertones of balance - yin / yang, male / female, black / white - humankind, the Priory perspective is not balanced.  The female is divine and the male is not.  That seems more than a little unbalanced to me.

What I would consider balanced is this - believing in the sanctity of man and woman, that woman cannot produce life without man nor can man without woman, that ultimate communion with Deity (creating life, thus becoming a creator like unto Deity) for man requires the woman and for woman requires man.  If one is divine, then so is the other.  If one is not, then neither is the other.  This is balanced.  This more correctly reflects the difference between man and woman.  Each needs the other to be whole.

This in no way is meant to disparage woman or the sacred feminine but simply to recognize that woman is only half of the equation.  Had the text reflected this as well, I think the ideas that seemed radical would have been much easier to swallow.  Then again...it's only a work of fiction, perhaps Brown was after a good thriller and not trying to be an ideologue.

I think I'll have to put up a page devoted to the books I've read / am reading.  I just finished 7 Habits of Highly Effective People this week and figured I'd read The DaVinci Code for a change of pace.  There are two points that I want to make about 7 Habits.

First, I'd say that some of the supporting arguments feel a bit contrived (perhaps that's just my skepticism), nevertheless the points are valid.  I think perhaps the most striking thing I'll remember from the book was near the beginning when discussing integrity.  The basic idea was that if you don't act with integrity, in time, everything you say or do will be viewed sceptically.  I have, arguably, a suspicious nature but for some people significantly more so than others.  There are some people I won't trust to be honest about anything unless I have at least one other source to verify the claim.

Second, it's very idealistic.  There are things that would be difficult to pull off.  Covey even acknowledges this himself.  At one point he says that if you practice this (I believe it was habit 5 seek first to understand then to be understood) others will likely feel you are trying to manipulate them.  (That's something I can well relate to, since I've heard it often against me and other missionaries.)  He recommended explaining what you were doing before doing it.  Something like - I'm trying out a recommended practice from the 7 habits...

I definitely think it was worth the time to read it.  It reminded me of another Covey book, Spiritual Roots of Human Relations, which I started reading back in high school.  One of these days I might even finish it. 

I just finished reading Seymour Hersh's Chain of Command : The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib.  As regular readers of my blog will know, especially last fall, I'm not a George W. Bush fan.  This book does not paint a stunning picture of him or his administration.  However, I don't think it is a simple matter of gravitating toward like minded opinions.  Hersh makes several compelling arguments.  If nothing else, it gave me a better understanding of the United States' relationship with countries of the Middle East.

Two weeks ago I was introduced to the Settlers of Catan board game.  I'd played a few electronic versions in the past and was not disappointed in the "real" thing.  Naturally, I couldn't resist getting my own copy.  Keith introduced me to a wonderful web site that had pricing with which I was pleasantly pleased - http://www.fairplaygames.com/.

As of this writing (and barring a lucky break on eBay), this site has the best prices that I could find.  If you want the whole kit and caboodle (as outlined below), you'll even get free shipping.

• Settlers of Catan
• Settlers of Catan 5-6 Player Expansion
• Settlers of Catan: Cities & Knights
• Settlers of Catan: Cities & Knights 5-6 Player Expansion
• Seafarers of Catan
• Seafarers of Catan 5-6 Player Expansion

(For those unfamiliar with the game, Cities & Knights and Seafarers require the base Settlers of Catan game.  In like manner, the expansions require their respective base games too.)

A bug was opened against the pricing model for Visual Studio 2005 on the Product Feedback Center.  Here's the link if you'd like to vote on its merits.

I'm less than pleased with the announced pricing plans for MSDN subscriptions that Microsoft announced this week.  For about five years, I've been an MSDN Universal Subscriber.  I used to describe it as "everything that Microsoft does that could benefit a developer...basically everything but Money and the games."  Now, things have become different.

The Universal subscription level goes away (as does Enterprise).  In their place is MSDN Premium.  However, Premium itself does not include a Visual Studio license.  (Well, it kind of does...)  You must select Team Edition for Architects with MSDN Premium, Team Edition for Developers with MSDN Premium, Team Edition for Testers with MSDN Premium, or Team Suite (includes the three previously named editions) for MSDN Premium.  Visual Studio Team Foundation Server is not included with any of those packages.

Why am I not pleased with this?

First, it caught me off guard.  All the hoopla about Team System the last two months wooed me to believe that I'd have all that VSTS goodness in the same subscription I've known and loved for years.  Little did I know that the subscription price was doubling (for the first year) and that it would provide less value (percentage-wise) than it did before.

Second, I don't like Microsoft's snow job.  They claim it simplifies licensing and lowers pricing.  So, two levels go away (Universal and Enterprise) and four new ones appear.  On the surface there is one price level (MSDN Premium) but in reality there are four different Visual Studio editions offered with Premium.  The old top tier price?  About 2700 MSRP.  The new top tier price?  About 11000 or 5500.  Where is that cost savings again?  Where is the simpler licensing?

Third,  I wear three hats - architect, developer, and tester.  Not only do I not want to pay 11,000 with my hats, but I also don't want three different versions of Visual Studio installed.  Presumably Team Suite will allow you to install the enhancements for the three roles on one VS installation, but I'm not too sure about that (and the product info pages aren't clear on that either).

Fourth, I want Microsoft to show its developers the respect they deserve.  Development tools should be a loss leader...which MSDN Universal has been for years, I'm sure.  We use the tools, which we get for a low cost, so that we can drive the need for Windows, Office System, and Windows Server System.  Why has .NET been adopted so quickly?  Because developers sold it to the masses.  Microsoft surely didn't do it.

Don't kill the goose that's laying your golden eggs, Mr. Microsoft.

My information comes from the following pages:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/howtobuy/vs2005/compare/

http://msdn.microsoft.com/howtobuy/vs2005/chart/

http://msdn.microsoft.com/howtobuy/vs2005/transition/

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2005/mar05/03-21DevToolsPricing.asp

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/mar05/03-21vs2005pr.asp

I've had the good fortune begin working with SQL Server 2005 and Visual Studio 2005.  I didn't rush right out and write stored procs in C#, but I have jumped into generics and anonymous delegates.  I'm using the February 2005 CTP and am impressed.

I haven't done a whole lot with new Yukon features, but I have been using the management tools / VS integration for a few weeks.  The first and most glaring issue is the lack of database diagrams in SQL Server Management Studio.  It seems that these will return before RTM, which is a very good thing.  I am very surprised that they were ever cut.  I can understand adding them to the VS integration piece, but I cannot understand removing them from SMS.  There are a hefty number of people that will use SMS and never touch VS...those folks deserve diagrams too.

Visual Studio is much quicker and stable than I expected.  So far the C# compiler has crashed three times on me and the VB compiler has crashed 15 or so time.  Despite that, however, the IDE didn't falter.  The standard send a crash report dialog came up, told me which compiler died, etc., but the IDE kept on chugging.  Kudos on the resilience.

One of my favorite new features is the code definition window...even for native framework types.  For those unfamiliar with it (View | Code Definition Window), it shows the prototypes (or full code if you've got the source) of the types, functions, etc. that you are currently mousing over.  It works like dynamic help does, but instead of showing help topics is shows code.  I've got that window full screen on my second monitor.  It's far easier to glance at that than it is to "Go to definition" then jump back.  It's also easier than firing up Reflector then alt+tabbing back to VS.

A close second to code definition is the added debugging support.  Debugger visualizers have gotten their fare share of press and with good reason.  They are quite nice.  What impresses me more is that enhanced immediate window features and the overall more helpful exceptions (including the exception window popup).  It's now far easier to see exactly where a problem occurred, what the current state of affairs is, and how that state was created...the needed info for problem solving.

I don't want to give the impression that this build is polished, because it isn't.  There is odd behavior now and then that is hard to repro (things just refusing to compile, coding executing and failing but then not failing a little later (same bits)), etc.).  The keyboard shortcuts are a little rough around the edges (right click, g (Generate stub OR Go to definition comes to mind)).  Refactoring / code snippets require an extra [enter] keystroke now and then.  All in all, though, I expect that RTM in a few months will address these issues.

 

I finally finished Kenneth Pollack's The Persian Puzzle today.  It is a book about US-Iranian relations.  It gives a brief look at the Iran over the last several thousand years, then focuses on the past fifty years or so.  It concludes with Pollack's advice, for lack of a better term, for US foreign policy with Iran.

One reason I'd recommend this book is that as a result of it, I have more respect for both Presidents Clinton and Bush (W) than I had before.  Regular readers of my blog know my feelings about Bush, and those who know me personally know that I feel similarly about Clinton.  I found this book to be unbiased, notwithstanding that it was written by a US citizen and non partisan.  If you're looking for a good read, check it out.

Now it's time for me to get back to 7 Habits, Code Complete, and Expert C# Business Objects...

Today marks one year and one day since I began blogging.  It's been an interesting experience.  I've fancied myself as a writer for quite some time, but knew that I'd never do much writing professionally.  After about 12 months of writing imagistic poetry in high school, I lost the knack (if I ever had it) of writing anything that a decent sized audience would find interesting.

12 months ago I was working on working for a software company a fair distance from here.  I was also in school working on finishing my degree.  The insane amount of snow that had fallen around Christmas and New Year's was finally melting allowing me to see the 25 saplings that I'd planted a few months earlier.

Today I'm working for a transportation services company headquartered in my own town.  I'm still schooling and hoping I don't burn out between now and a little after this time next year when I should be finished.  The sapling were uprooted (along with everything else in my yard) to lay the sod that now greets me each day as I return from work.  I'm reading Steven Covey's Seven Habits of Highly Effective People and am planning to read Kenneth Pollack's The Persian Puzzle in the near future.

12 months from now, I'll likely still be working for Flying J and will likely still be in school (though nearing graduation).  My sod will probably be leveled out and have had a spring and summer of mowing.  I just might be an agile developer and write test harnesses before implementing design specs.  I'd like to get into TDD or XP, 2005 just might be the year.

I'm not a sci-fi guy or a fantasy guy.  If I read, I'm typically reading about religious stuff or code.  A few years ago, for some unknown reason, I picked up Ender's Shadow and read the back cover.  About 28 hours later (yes, I did sleep...I think), I finished it.  I did likewise with Ender's Game, Shadow of the Hegemon, and Shadow Puppets.  Tonight, I happily discovered that Orson Scott Card has finished the last (I think) in the Shadow series - Shadow of the Giant.  The first three chapters are available on the site.