COMMENTS - CMPUT 410

Transcription

1 COMMENTS - CMPUT 410 WEB APPS FOR PDAs The presentation was overall well done, showing enthusiasm about the topic and professionalism. However, as a decision maker, I am still not convinced whether I should adopt the technology or forget about it. I whished you showed some HTML examples and possibly some code at a web-application level to cater to both PDA and web browsers. Fixated on small screen/14 browsers. What about standards bodies? W3C? I don t like to see presenter reading his notes. One group member did not say a word, which I don t know why. I like the research that they have done for the future trends. The presentation is perfect but there is some part where their speech is not smooth. Maybe needs more practice? Best: Appropriate length, covered the basic stuff. Worst: Not enough specific technical details. Good: Great business-like presentation. Bad: Some excellent speakers, some poor ones. An improvement would be to plan so the good speakers handled the presentation. Good: Lots of info, very knowledgeable. Cons: Lots of information repeated by multiple team members. Pros: Very knowledgeable about the topic. Cons: No smooth pass-offs. The presentation has more??????. Wished there was a bit more technical. Ex PDA code would have been great to show the difference between regular??? dev and PC dev. Good presentation, lots of useful information. Best: They all spoke well and clear and have good slide content. Worst: N/A Business analysis seems only minimally related to main topic of web apps for PDAs. Nicely presented slides, orderly content. Would have liked to learn more on how to develop web apps for PDAs. Good: Knowledgeable - examples and discussion good. Bad: Repeating information at the beginning. Best thing was insight into the future for the technology. Answers to questions were kinda generic, but the main presentation was good. JAVA SERVER FACES The start was really lousy. Try to put JSF in the context by motivating it and introducing it. It doesn t seem that you prepared this presentation as a team. As you lost your audience in the beginning, it was difficult to catch up. Beginning was paced way too fast; 5 minutes in, I still really had no idea what it was all about. Pictures or diagrams or examples would really help in understanding. Just what exactly is JSF???? An API? A programming language?

2 An extension of an existing language? None of this was answered until near the end. The ending and questions were handled well. Very detailed. The questions are handled very well. Best: Lots of information. Worst: Some of the presentation was awkward. Good: Made it applicable to modern programming methods and uses (good to invest in). Demo of existing libraries making development easier. Bad: Different group members seemed to have vastly varying planning and understanding of their information. Good: Nice looking example, knowledgeable. Cons: Felt a little rushed. Pros: Lots of interesting high level information. Cons: Started out a little bit rough. Went through slides a little quickly. Did not have time to read them. To begin with no explanations about JSF that I could understand so I was lost for most of the presentation. Worst: Hard to understand some speakers. Best: Good examples. Seems like the group hasn t seen the slides before sometimes, but they still appear knowledgeable of the contents of these slides. Would like an intro of what JSF is and does. Very good example. Too much detail, too much info. Introduction too brief/not informative. Great presentation but you really lost me at the start. I spent a lot of time scrambling to catch up. Very good handling of questions. A little too much information presented. Best: Relevant example, thorough research on topic. Worst: First presenter rushed through, couldn t fully read some of them. BUILDING AN APPLICATION THAT SERVES RSS FEEDS Good presentation on the different versions of the protocol and on how to subscribe to an RSS. I wished you spent more time detailing more the part of creating an RSS with an example step by step. It seems that the audience didn t get this part clearly. Even showing a scenario where the web app changes the XML doc would be more convincing. A demo with a simple XML doc being changed and a RSS reader announcing the even would have been great. Worst: I thought this was about building RSS, not about the technology itself. Very little technical information. Didn t cover generation or features of the xml. The explanation of RSS feeds was not really well explained until the question period. The BBC page was presented as an example, but there was no visual aids to actually compare the site w/the xml file for the BBC site. Good slides. I m not really sure how RSS really works until the question period. I think a slide on it would be useful. Best: Good overall presentation and slides. Worst: Short on time, some questions were difficult to answer for them.

3 Pro: the presentation was very informative. Con: Not all members participated equally. Good: Slides looked great. Bad: Organization lacked structure, better to have headings per section. One of the good things about the presentation was when David explained the graphs using an example we all have seen and explaining how we see it at each stage. Daniel s part of the presentation seemed a little broken at times and it seemed like he could have been better prepared. I also feel an interactive (meaning show us on a browser) demo would have made it clearer and would have been easy to do. I like the slide, the flow is good. Seems like kind of stuck in the question and answer part. I think the presentation was confusing to me. Was too much info about RSS itself, not enough on the programs that create them. Worst: Some presenters were nervous so it made it hard to focus on the content of the presentation and draw attention to the presenters themselves. Best: Good slides. Presented in very understandable manner, standard RSS info, nothing major and really new. The presentation was well done but would like more information about the server side. PYTHON Excellent presentation, informative and convincing. The handover was very good. The examples presented were excellent. I would have liked to see the different styles of programming within python as stated in the presentation. Some say Python allows you to program in almost like Lisp. Seeing examples of that would have been good. Best: Very informative on high level of issue. Worst: I would have liked more stats on routine vs other languages and perhaps other lower level issues with the language. Somewhat plain slides demo was informative. Good pacing for the first half, but numerous slip-ups and mistakes in the second half, pacing also fell apart. Good content, some needless repetition during the presentation. No mention of web frameworks (Django, Turbogears, etc) Just went a little overtime. Slides are well organized but too verbose (too much info). Good introduction to the technology, but there was not enough evidence to convince me to switch. Good presentation skills. Slides overlap a little in subject area. Best: Demos were interesting and engaging. Worst: So many presenters made for uneven pacing and also no business viability discussion (economic aspect). The best thing is the organization is good. I really like the part of the integration. I feel the demo was a little rushed. Felt a little drawn out in parts, but was quite informative.

4 Worst: Hard to follow demo. Best: Easy to understand. Best thing: Demo (shows sample application of language) Worst thing: Pacing of advantages/disadvantages section slow. Very good presentation. Some parts were slow but overall very good. Too long. FLASHY WEB APPLICATIONS WITH FLASH The presentation was missing a demo for editing. Good transition between presenters and the presentation seems well prepared. It was however too long and the final demo was not prepared.. Introduction of alternatives was appreciated. Ajax is not an alternative. Flash has an Ajax equivalent in it. Intro was too long. If I was a CTO, I wouldn t care all that much about a detailed history of the product, but rather how I can apply it to my business. Too manys points on the slides. Showing different technologies was a great choice in alternative comparison. The best thing: The presentation is well prepared. The worst thing: None. Good: Colorful, catching slides. Bad: Could have used some sample code. Text on slides gets blended into the images on the slide. Not sure what the images represent or how it relates to Flash. A lot of change-overs can get distracting & the flow is not as smooth. Good: Pros/cons were very applicable to the class and informative. Bad: History section was too long and didn t contribute any understanding of Flash. Very good analysis of pros and cons. A flash presentation would be nice. Nice and informative. Lots of stumbles and mistakes, well over 20 minutes, needed a practice rehearsal. Unfortunately the demo didn t work. Pros: Presentation moved well even thought pressed for time. Cons: Slides were a little bit cartoonish. Best: Clear and simple slides. Worst: Demo didn t work. RUBYONRAILS Forgetting the slides and using 4x4 PDF slides was a mistake. The handover was disorganized and so were the slides sometimes. The content of the presentation was informative. Comparison with other frameworks was excellent. Good idea showing examples. Example was slightly too long & detailed; hard to pay attention that long. Should stick with one example. As such, there was a lot of redundant information. Best: Good content, good demos. Bad: Way too long. Slides not organized. Pros: Lots of interesting information, cool examples. Cons: Presentation started a little bit rough. Some of the slides were too wordy, but overall a good presentation.

5 Lots of info, which is good, but text seems crammed on slides and I spent more time trying to read and understand that listening to the speaker. Nice concise examples. Worst: The slides were too small to read. Best: Good content. Very knowledgeable. Poorly planned presentation somewhat disjointed. Good organization of presentation. Please define scaffolding. Good: Example illustrating benefits of RubyOnRails. Bad: Example section was too long. Some of the presenters were disorganized and the presentation was too long. The slides look great but hard to read because ot the view. Got better at the end when Howard zoomed in. Liked how the team showed RubyOnRails link to other relevant/popular technologies. Good: Tough subject. Bad: Should have used powerpoint or something, shuffling through a 2 x 6 PDF is distracting. Rm* ing your directory? Either don t mention that or go to lab admin and recover it because it makes the presentation look sloppy. The worst thing: Not organized.