More InfoQube answers needed
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Cassius
Nov 28, 2008 at 02:03 PM
RE: Alexander Deliyannis comments.
I was thinking the same thing yesterday. Either Pierre has a team of programmers supporting him or he is a tireless superman with superhuman programming abilities. (Having done a bit of programming many years ago, I know that when one thinks 30 minutes of programming has passed by, one finds that it was actually 3 hours.)
On GrandView: The outlining part was not too unintuitive, but category/assignment/column part was, at the time, highly unintuitive. I spent much time learning it and then remapping the keyboard commands to closely match similar commands in WordPerfect, my word processor at the time.
The secret to successful learning and teaching is to do it step-by-step, starting with the simplest first, such as, “how do I type information into IQ and then store it?” Simple examples are also very helpful.
-c
Posted by Jan Rifkinson
Nov 28, 2008 at 09:54 PM
Cassius wrote:
>RE: Alexander Deliyannis comments.
>
>I was thinking the same thing yesterday.
>Either Pierre has a team of programmers supporting him or he is a tireless superman
>with superhuman programming abilities. (Having done a bit of programming many years
>ago, I know that when one thinks 30 minutes of programming has passed by, one finds that
>it was actually 3 hours.)
I have the feeling Pierre sometimes wishes he had a team of programmers but I don’t think that’s the case. AFAIK he works alone like Tom Davis (Zoot) & Hert (IDImager), all of whom are articulate, helpful, smart.
Posted by Stephen R. Diamond
Dec 1, 2008 at 12:21 AM
Jan Rifkinson wrote:
>
>You have no idea how much I have my fingers crossed
>for Pierre & the future of InfoQube.
Some would cry “Jinx.” ;)
Posted by Jan Rifkinson
Dec 3, 2008 at 09:30 PM
Stephen R. Diamond wrote:
>Jan Rifkinson wrote:
>>
>
>
>>You have no idea how much I have my fingers crossed
>
>>for Pierre & the future of InfoQube.
>
>Some would cry “Jinx.” ;)
Some would ;-)
>
>
>
>
>