Tag Archives: development

The Difference Between Localization and Nationalization

I am (mostly) not a programmer, but I’ve been exposed to materials developed for programmers, including materials from a company then known as Apple Computer.

Macintosh programming was new

The Macintosh was new at the time, and there was a learning curve for programmers who were used to character-based interfaces such as MS-DOS. In fact, some programmers were derided for putting DOS-like designs on the Mac platform.

Including Microsoft. Early versions of Microsoft Word used dot commands and other non-Mac interfaces, so we switched to another word processor (FullWrite Professional) which featured a true graphic interface. Unfortunately it was EXTREMELY slow, so we switched back to Word, dot commands and all.

But Apple Computer’s approach to development wasn’t just limited to the look and feel.

The resource fork

Pre-Mac, programmers would create code to compile into a single executable. Then if they needed, say, a French version, they would edit the code, take the English bits out, and put the French bits in.

But files in the original Macintosh File System had two parts: a data fork, and a resource fork. You could edit the resource fork without touching the data fork.

Which meant that it was a lot easier to create that French version of a program.

“Because all the pictures and text were stored separately in a resource fork, it could be used to allow a non-programmer to translate an application for a foreign market, a process called internationalization and localization.”

Localization

Or to create any version of a program.

Because of the ease of the process, software developers were not restricted to providing a single software version per country. Residents of Belgium, Canada, China, South Africa, and Switzerland could each receive software in their own local language. And the French Canadian version differed from the Swiss French version. (Or it should have differed.)

Software users received software just for them. And everybody won.

Sadly, this post is not localized, which is why non-U.S. readers are being bombarded with zeds.

Human-reviewed AI-generated Code for Efficiency and Accuracy

When looking at how to solve a problem, it’s sometimes helpful to look at the two extreme solutions.

What if you have a coding project? The extremes are as follows:

  • Let your favorite generative AI tool vibe code a solution.
  • Require your coders to perform old-school coding with no assistance whatsoever. (OK, maybe a book or something.)

I’ve mentioned Silicon Tech Solutions in the Bredemarket blog before, so I was curious how they approached the task. Turns out the company wrote an article about it, “How AI Coding Tools Are Revolutionizing Development – And Why the Right Prompt Matters.”

An example of a “wrong” prompt:

“Optimize this SQL query.”

And here’s an example of a “right” prompt, guided by a development expert:

“Optimize this SQL query to reduce execution time on a large PostgreSQL table with millions of records. Indexing suggestions would be helpful.”

Because knowledge of coding IS good when you code stuff. And Silicon Tech Solutions uses this knowledge when it uses generative AI coding tools:

At Silicon Tech Solutions, we actively use Cursor to enhance our development workflow. By integrating AI-powered coding tools, we:

🔹 Reduce development time while maintaining high standards.

🔹 Automate repetitive tasks, allowing developers to focus on core logic.

🔹 Ensure clean and optimized code, reducing technical debt.

However, AI does not replace human expertise—it enhances it. Our team carefully reviews and refines AI-generated code to align with best practices and business requirements.

If you want Silicon Tech Solutions’ expertise at your disposal, request a meeting.

Because a Marketer Needs to Eat: Translating OpenAPI Version Difference Explanations into Marketing-Speak

To better understand two of the projects for a Bredemarket client, I asked Google Gemini for an explanation of the differences between OpenAPI versions 3.1.1, 3.1.2, and 3.2.

Google Gemini provided me with that explanation.

Then I supplied the following prompt:

Rewrite the above so a marketer can understand it.

Here is part of what Google Gemini provided to me.

🏗️ OpenAPI 3.1.1 & 3.1.2: The “Under the Hood” Fixes

These versions were like a restaurant updating its internal plumbing. They didn’t change what was on the menu, but they made sure the kitchen (the code) followed the latest global safety standards (JSON Schema).

  • The Goal: Accuracy and stability.
  • The Benefit: It ensures that when a developer tries to connect to your service, they don’t run into “grammar” errors in the documentation.

✨ OpenAPI 3.2: The “UX & Branding” Upgrade

Released recently (late 2025), this version is all about making your API easier to sell and easier to use.

1. Organized Menus (Hierarchical Tags)

Before, your API list was just one long, flat list of features.

  • Old way: A messy “junk drawer” of links.
  • 3.2 way: You can now create folders and sub-categories (e.g., Payments > Refunds > International). This makes your documentation look professional and much easier for customers to navigate.

2. Better Support for AI and Live Data (Streaming)

If your product uses AI or real-time data (like a live stock ticker or a ChatGPT-style chat), 3.2 is a game-changer. It has a specific way to describe “Streaming” data so developers know exactly what to expect from your “live” features.

3. The “Smart Search” (The QUERY Method)

In older versions, developers often had to “hack” the system to do complex searches. 3.2 introduces a dedicated Search button (the QUERY method) that is cleaner, safer, and follows modern web standards.

4. IoT & Smart Device Support

If your product works on a Smart TV, an Apple Watch, or an IoT device, 3.2 finally adds official support for “Device Pairing” (that thing where you enter a code on a website to log in to your TV).

Hey, it helped me. Marketers need to eat, and writers understand grammar.