Re: People don't want to help lazy gits here!
Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
PofN said something like:
I have been following some posts in here recently and I have
noticed that whenever some newbie asks a question regarding suggestions
for good tutorials, the usual answer is "Google".
Nothing wrong with that. This group is not a help desk.
There is *everything* wrong with that.
Let's take the OP's example of asking for suggestions for good tutorials.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with asking for such things in that regard
because he would be asking the audience of java experts what their opinions
were. If you were to ask a group of folks at lunch if they knew of any good
tutorials in something you're a newbie at, I'm sure you'd *love* to hear
"google it first" with the implication that you've just done something
Some of the differences that exist between 'google/usenet'
and 'co-workers/lunch' are..
- Google is 'just a URL away' for Usenet users. In most instances
it requires less key-strokes to do a good search, than to frame a
sentence that asks the question.
- It's easier to talk than type.
- Google can access information from yesterday, last week or
last year. OTOH - if the co-worker said the answer last week, while
you were not in attendance, or were not paying close attention,
you might have missed it.
- You know the co-workers, but often the people that
ask/answer on Usenet are strangers. There is a basis
of understanding between individuals at lunch that does
not exist on Usenet (usually). End results of this might be..
- The responder on Usenet does not know if the questioner
is even aware of the power and utility of a quality search,
with someone you know, you might have an idea.
- That a person feels entirely comfortable saying things
face-to-face that would go down on Usenet like a 'Lead Brick'.
At lunch, I *would* consider the answer 'Google it first'
to be rude, stupid or pointless - unless the person was
grinning when they said it.
Lunch and Usenet are not the same thing, and not
(T.G.M. from another message on this thread)
"And how is the newbie supposed to know which of the tutorials returned by
google are of good quality? And since when does a result returned from
Google indicate "the correct answer"?
And how is the newbie supposed to know which of the
(books at the shop/co-workers advice) are of good quality?
And since when does a result returned from
(book/co-worker) indicate "the correct answer"?
While the quality of books might *generally* be higher
than that of 'any old web-page', being written on paper
does not 'make it right'.
Despite the virtues of all the fine books mentioned on this
thread, I've seen some books that were absolute *crap* -
they were best used as kindling.
The advantage of web-pages and google in respect
to accuracy are that you usually end up with more
than one hit.
While the information from one page might be wrong,
it is unlikely that information from 3, or 7 different pages
will be consistently wrong. (Or if it is, that falsehood
will be repeated in the texts - if we suddenly discover
'The Earth is not flat' - which information will change first,
books, or web-pages?)
Oh go on.. (someone) whine about having to check
several web-pages, get me started about cross
referencing information from *books*..