Slashdot Mirror


PCs Use More Sick Days Than People

lunarscape writes "ZDNet is running an article about the 'absentee' rate of PCs in various UK workplaces. According to the article, while the average employee was out sick seven days a year, the average PC was inoperable due to a virus nine days a year. The article also discusses junk e-mail's impact on productivity, with one business reporting that 99.84 percent of all incoming mail is spam."

306 comments

  1. My computer is perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It never has any problems and is always worki

    1. Re:My computer is perfect by Solar+Limb · · Score: 1, Funny

      Boy, you must be a fun guy at the bar.

    2. Re:My computer is perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything except the N and G keys.

    3. Re:My computer is perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, you are such an assh

    4. Re:My computer is perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The computer has the Slashdot.Submit.Early-A virus.

    5. Re:My computer is perfect by eXoXe · · Score: 0

      Hehe. Sorry. I've been waiting on someone to leave the office so I can play games, but he's just sitting around and not leaving. I'm a bit pissy!

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    6. Re:My computer is perfect by hiryuu · · Score: 2, Funny

      That would have been funny except you had to hit the post button in order for us to see it.

      Greetings, Captain Pedantic! It's swell to see you on the job!

      --
      Karma: Excellent, but still won't get you laid.
    7. Re:My computer is perfect by recursiv · · Score: 1

      It's been done more than adequately in the past anyway. It's time to start calling people on the technical deficiencies in their played out jokes.

      --
      I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
    8. Re:My computer is perfect by krewemaynard · · Score: 1

      lighten.

      up.

      :-D

      --
      I saw it on Slashdot, it must be true!
    9. Re:My computer is perfect by moonbender · · Score: 1

      Oh the keys work fine, it's just the lowercase versions that don't work for him.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    10. Re:My computer is perfect by smithmc · · Score: 1

      It never has any problems and is always worki...

      OK, hah hah. But I've got a Win2K server sitting next to me that has not been booted in a couple of months, and has never BSOD'd. My WinXP notebook at work stays up 5 days a week, every week (I shut it down on weekends) and has never BSOD'd. The last time any machine of mine was successfully infected by a virus was before Windows 95 came out. The only reason for a "sick PC" is total ignorance or extreme laziness.

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    11. Re:My computer is perfect by Daengbo · · Score: 1
    12. Re:My computer is perfect by smithmc · · Score: 1

      How about going to the wrong webpage?

      How dare you imply that I would actually use Internet Explorer! ;-b

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    13. Re:My computer is perfect by freakmn · · Score: 1
      OK, hah hah. But I've got a Win2K server sitting next to me that has not been booted in a couple of months, and has never BSOD'd.


      Hmm... I didn't think that a computer would blue screen if you never booted it. I would think you would at least need to get to the bootloader before that occurs. Maybe I'll try leaving off the windows machines I come across, just so they won't BSOD!

      Oh, you mean rebooted! ;)
      --
      warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
  2. Traffic stress by SIGALRM · · Score: 5, Funny

    42 percent say they found it less stressful fighting their way through rush-hour traffic than finding legitimate e-mails among the spam

    Living in Seattle, they might think differently.

    --
    Sigs cause cancer.
    1. Re:Traffic stress by Nixoloco · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Living in Seattle, they might think differently.

      .. or Northern Virginia!!!

    2. Re:Traffic stress by paranode · · Score: 5, Funny

      Is there less spam in Seattle??

      :)

    3. Re:Traffic stress by Alexis+Brooke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Bah. Try sorting through your e-mail while sitting in rush-hour traffic. And do it with a rabid wolverine in your underwear. Then talk to me about stressful.

      --
      This is a special excite .sig
      This
    4. Re:Traffic stress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heh, you west coasters, seattle isint that bad, try crossing the George Washington Bridge or going through the Lincoln tunnel to get into Manhattan

      or try going into downtown Boston

    5. Re:Traffic stress by SIGALRM · · Score: 1

      try crossing the George Washington Bridge

      Lol.... you obviously have NO IDEA what the 520 bridge is.

      Staring at Bill's house for an hour is torture.

      --
      Sigs cause cancer.
    6. Re:Traffic stress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hehe Id rather stare at bills house than smell the crap and exhaust fumes in the lincoln tunnel for AT LEAST an hour.

    7. Re:Traffic stress by Toresica · · Score: 1

      This is all making me very glad I usually bike instead of driving. :)

    8. Re:Traffic stress by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      If you ask the people who live there, every place in the world has the worst traffic, the worst weather, the worst crime, the worst government, the worst schools ... Every. Single. Place. In. The. World.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:Traffic stress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      What really sucks is that my computer and I carpool.

      "Boss, I can't make it in today... my ride is sick."

      "&^%#(!!"

    10. Re:Traffic stress by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      George Washington Bridge, 520 bridge, bah. Let's try the Woodrow Wilson Bridge--the most heavily travelled bridge in the DC area is a *drawbridge*. As in "We bring traffic to a complete halt every day or two to open the bridge" drawbridge.

      Chris Mattern

    11. Re:Traffic stress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      George Washington Bridge, 520 bridge, bah. Let's try the Woodrow Wilson Bridge--the most heavily travelled bridge in the DC area is a *drawbridge*. As in "We bring traffic to a complete halt every day or two to open the bridge" drawbridge.

      Sounds like the Belt Parkway up in NYC, up around JFK airport.

    12. Re:Traffic stress by arkhan_jg · · Score: 1

      And do it with a rabid wolverine in your underwear. And how did a rabid wolverine come to be wearing your underwear in the first place?

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
    13. Re:Traffic stress by themusicgod1 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      no way. as a canadian i know my government has done quite lot of wrong...but they are made of descent people with descent intentions, with a few exceptions. I think the american government is totalitarian and fascist, to a growing degree each year.

      a lot of americans say that they have the best government and that totalitarian places like china should adopt their form of government.

      a lot of the chinese(the only iranian) i've talked to about the situation seem to think the american government is a totalitarian government(the people being just honest folk), etc.
      some places think they have the best place to live in the world.

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    14. Re:Traffic stress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      What the FUCK are you talking about and WHAT IN GODS NAME does it have to do with GRANDPARENT???


      Sooooo offtopic.

    15. Re:Traffic stress by smithmc · · Score: 1

      42 percent say they found it less stressful fighting their way through rush-hour traffic than finding legitimate e-mails among the spam

      One word for those folks: Mozilla. I have to deal with maybe half a dozen spams a day, out of 50-100 emails. The rest just "softly and silently vanish away".

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    16. Re:Traffic stress by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      Near my house in Bangkok, Thailand (known for it's wonderful traffic), there is an overpass which has been under construction for ten years. The police have to alternate direction of traffic every 20 minutes, because there is a single lane. 1.5 hours for about 3km.

    17. Re:Traffic stress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have a rabid wolverine, you insensitive clod!

  3. Weird comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can't really remember the last time I got sick, but I'm pretty sure the treatment was not to re-image myself.

    1. Re:Weird comparison by acrolein · · Score: 1

      Now this would make a great comedy routine.

      --
      when come back bring pie
    2. Re:Weird comparison by SunPin · · Score: 0

      Yeah, for this kind of audience. I laugh out loud at least once every time I read /. and I wish other people could understand some of the humor here but it won't happen. I think the majority of readers here are blessed with a higher level of intelligence than the rest of society. I know the ACs are going to eat that comment alive but it's true.

      --
      Laws are for people with no friends.
    3. Re:Weird comparison by KevinKnSC · · Score: 1

      For the 5% who get it.

    4. Re:Weird comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      knowledge != intelligence

      I am sick and tired of listening to "nerds' spout out this nonsense. Just because you can compile a kernel or know how to program in 10 different languages does not mean you have some high level of intelligence.

      Intelligence is about application of logic. Intelligent people have more of a capacity to understand logic. I am not saying the slashdot croud isn't generally more intelligent than your typical person but computer dorks in all my cs classes think that they are all a genius (while they have trouble with calc 1 and other liberal arts courses). I see this in hundreds of posts on slahsdot. Most people here are mediocre. Just because you are a nerd does not mean that you have attained a more enlightened state. It just means that you have interests in something society unjustly characterized as "special" or "complex." Just about anyone can learn how to do most of the crap we know how to do. They just don't enjoy it as much. And so I Ramble On....

      I can't stand elitists.
      I wish i was registered so i could see how much i am flamed.
      T

    5. Re:Weird comparison by recursiv · · Score: 1

      not even anonymous, but here you go:

      knowing what re-imaging is does not equate to intelligence. that is specific learned knowledge. not knowing what re-imaging is would prevent someone from understand the joke, but does not make them stupid.

      PS, i didn't really think it was funny in the first place.

      --
      I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
    6. Re:Weird comparison by Robert+Borkowski · · Score: 3, Funny

      If that was the treatment, how would you tell?

      --
      This .sig intentionally left blank
    7. Re:Weird comparison by siriuskase · · Score: 1

      So that explains Madonna

      --
      If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
    8. Re:Weird comparison by Smallpond · · Score: 4, Funny

      I can't stand elitists, either. That puts you and me in a special class, right?

      As for nerds being enlightened, study this koan:

      A software engineer had an impending deadline. As she worked
      she found that the investors were closing in threatening
      a takeover and layoffs. The night before the deadline arrived and
      the engineer was late at work, when she found a basic flaw
      in the architecture of the software which could take months
      to fix.

      Just then the pizza arrived. How sweet it tasted!


    9. Re:Weird comparison by mbadolato · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, for this kind of audience. I laugh out loud at least once every time I read /. and I wish other people could understand some of the humor here but it won't happen. I think the majority of readers here are blessed with a higher level of intelligence than the rest of society.

      It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with, we're part of the same field of interest and thus understand what's being implied.

      If we were sitting at a table and overheard a group of brain surgeons telling a story and one said something like "...and he tried to use a WZ427 blade for the incision!!!!!!" and they all started laughing hysterically, we'd be like "WTF???".

      That's because we don't know the subject matter, not because we're less intelligent.

    10. Re:Weird comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I take it you haven't been exposed to New Age medicine?

    11. Re:Weird comparison by Schwartzboy · · Score: 1

      Funny you should say that. My wife, who definitely doesn't fit in with the rank-and-file sheeple that make up the bulk of society, looks at me blankly every time I laugh at something on /. and try to explain the jokes to her. This happens especially often when SCO appears in the headlines. Maybe it takes not just bright people, but a particular kind of person (*coughGEEKYcough*) to understand some of the /. humor.

      The very ACs who would eat that comment alive are likely to fit into "the rest of society" anyway...just take one look at a "frosty piss" or "gnaa" post and you'll see my point.

      --
      "Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix"- Kieren O'Shaughnessy
    12. Re:Weird comparison by Jane_Dozey · · Score: 1

      Actually intelligence is to do with many different factors, not _just_ logical thought.
      You need to be able to think abstractly aswell.

      --
      Silly rabbit
    13. Re:Weird comparison by ViolentGreen · · Score: 1

      PS, i didn't really think it was funny in the first place

      I'm really amazaed at most of the stuff listed as funny. I got tired of posts about beowulf clusters and Soviet Russia being at the top level so I browse at funny -3. Slashdot has been much more enjoyable since then.

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
    14. Re:Weird comparison by recursiv · · Score: 3, Insightful
      ... My wife, who definitely doesn't fit in with the rank-and-file sheeple that make up the bulk of society, ...


      And don't get me started on people who use the word 'sheeple'. Let me give you a hint, buddy. You're not as far above the average as you think you are.
      --
      I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
    15. Re:Weird comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true...But you still need to make some sense of those abstract thoughts. I agree that i should have added that also.

      T

    16. Re:Weird comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      she found a basic flaw in the architecture of the software which could take months to fix.

      Was the flaw that it was written in Visual Basic?

    17. Re:Weird comparison by epistemology · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I, too, look down my nose at elitists.

    18. Re:Weird comparison by eqkivaro · · Score: 1

      while they have trouble with calc 1 and other liberal arts courses

      since when is calc a liberal arts course? i certainly agree with the spirit of your post, though i don't agree that "just about anyone can learn how to do most of the crap that we know how to do." there are just too many people out there who are still afraid of their VCR, er, DVD player. :)

    19. Re:Weird comparison by Drooling+Iguana · · Score: 1

      The bullet is enormous...there is no escaping! Jumping...is useless!

      That's because you're supposed to duck them. There's pretty much always an indentation in the ground when those things come after you.

      Of course, if you're riding Yoshi at the time, you're pretty much screwed.

      --
      ... I'm addicted to placebos
    20. Re:Weird comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the point is that liberal arts courses are the basis of behind creating well rounded human beings. highly intelligent people will learn things from these courses and apply them to reality. All math courses are used to develop logical thinking. Other courses are designed to give you knowledge that you apply logic to in order to make decesions and slowly develop yourself as a person. People that do bad in these courses (I would say) are not higly intelligent people. Or if they are they have other issuses like depression, or some negative attitude toward learning. I thinks it's safe to say that highly intelligent people will excel in math courses.
      Hense the comparison.
      T

    21. Re:Weird comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Lets look at it like this...

      Would you consider an auto mechanic a highly intelligent person?
      sometimes maybe they are but generally they are not because most PEOPLE are not. They just know alot of shit about cars. They can baffle me with engine talk just like most of us can baffle them with computer talk. There are a select few of people here are very intelligent and apply that in the computer field (Im not talking about them). Im talking about the average joe that lives at this site only because he likes this kind of crap.
      Basically what i saying is that no matter what field you look at there will be close to the same number of really intelligent people and everyone else.
      T

    22. Re:Weird comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't they fix Spock that way?

    23. Re:Weird comparison by Schwartzboy · · Score: 1

      I smell a troll, but I'll bite.

      And don't get me started on people who use the word 'sheeple'.
      For what it's worth, that's the first and probably last time that I intend to ever use that word in a sentence. It was based on the assumption that a reader would understand what I meant to say without feeling angry, unhappy, insecure, or morally superior while also not forcing that reader to wade through page after page of my thoughts on what it means to be an average member of society. Obviously, I was wrong on a number of levels.

      Let me give you a hint, buddy. You're not as far above the average as you think you are.
      Let me make certain that I understand this. I posted an offhand comment made up of something like four sentences to Slashdot, and you were able to determine me approximate level of intelligence or whatever you're measuring relative to the average, and have found me lacking with respect to my own self-proclaimed superiority. I'm in awe of...something.

      To clarify, I can confidently say that I'm above and below a lot of averages, if you believe the statistics that various groups present as fact. I'm above average in terms of the years I've spent in higher education, but does that automatically mean that I'm more intelligent than an average person? Maybe, maybe not, but first I'm genuinely interested in how you determine "intelligence". I have below average debt. Does that say anything about my worth as a person, or does it simply imply that I'm lucky? I'm fairly certain that I'm above the average recommended weight for someone of my gender and height. Does that earn me a label of "fatty" to accompany the earlier derisive "buddy"? I don't know about "above average", but I take pride in being other-than-average in a lot of ways, period.

      How do you do it? What exactly is the world like, seen from your perspective? I'm bored enough to be genuinely curious, and I'll go so far as to apologize if my response comes across sounding as snide as yours did because that was never my intention.

      --
      "Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix"- Kieren O'Shaughnessy
    24. Re:Weird comparison by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      I take it you haven't been exposed to New Age medicine?

      But he might not remember it.
      Although I hear the same effect can be had in a car crash or bar night.

    25. Re:Weird comparison by recursiv · · Score: 1

      It wasn't intended to be a troll. Sorry for being so short with you.

      Language is a funny thing. Words convey meanings, but carry all kinds of shades of other meanings and connotations with them. Great rhetoricians use this to their advantage. Here is my understanding of the definition of the word 'sheeple', along with some of the things that cross my mind when I hear someone use the word sheeple. I will grant you that they may not always be correct, but one should be aware of connotations of words they use in any case. Here we go:

      * An individual sheeple (hereafter I will refer to the singular as 'sherson') tends to do what they are told. They stay in the herd, which is exactly where 'the man' wants them to say. The sherson is not really aware of anything outside this structure.
      * The speaker considers him/herself not to be a sherson. This might be because they question authority, analyze their surroundings, etc. The speaker truly lives outside the system, man.
      * The speaker considers the majority of people to satisfy the requirements for being sheeple.
      * The word is derisive.

      With these things in mind, all people have their own systems of rating other people. I am intentionally being somewhat vague, because it varies from person to person, but everyone forms an opinion of people they meet based on some factor(s). Of course it can change over time as they learn more about the person, but everyone rates people somehow. Furthermore, almost everyone (including me) is above average in their own system of rating, whatever it may be.

      Let's look at a trivial example. Susie only cares about travelling. Her opinions of other people is 100% determined by how much/where they have traveled. Of course, she herself has traveled extensively. Of course, this is a ridiculous example, but I think it's less far-fetched than it might seem. Right here on slashdot, I have seen numerous examples of people mistaking lack of specific knowledge about certain technologies to be equivalent to lack of intelligence. To get back to Susie, I don't think there is anything wrong with her particular system, unless, and this is the big UNLESS: unless she considers herself to be better than people who haven't traveled as much. If Susie understands that these people probably don't care much about traveling and accepts that they are into something else, then that's fine. However, I think there is something wrong if Susie thinks these people obviously suck at traveling, since they've never even been to Africa for crying out loud. The example is somewhat contrived, but think this kind of thinking is startlingly common. People get blasted all the time here on slashdot for not knowing how to do on a computer what we would think of as something obvious. And I think that some people actually believe that this makes them an inferior person.

      In summary, 'sheeple' gives me (and others) the impression that the speaker is arrogant. That is the bottom line. 'sheeple' == arrogance. Of course, it's quite conceivable that you are not arrogant, but the things you say do affect how you're perceived.

      However, you certainly seem reasonable, especially in this post, so I will admit there is a chance I have misjudged you. Sorry for rambling for so long, but I wanted to (attempt to) articulate clearly my thoughts on the subject. I think it may have come out somewhat muddled, but I hope you are able to see my main point.

      I'm curious what your reaction to this will be.

      --
      I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
    26. Re:Weird comparison by Schwartzboy · · Score: 1
      Actually, I more or less agree with your definition of "sheeple", including (now that I've thought about it) the arrogant and condescending overtones. I've tried a couple of times to compose a comprehensive and coherent reply to this, but I keep failing, so I'll try to quickly sum up the things I wanted to mention:

      Another important aspect of the "sheeple" mentality, as I see it, is that ignorance is bliss. Not "I choose to be ignorant of rocket science so that I can focus on genetic engineering, which makes me happy", but a sincere effort to remain as ignorant as possible of as much as possible, period. Your average sherson, in my view of the world, doesn't mind being part of the herd or trapped in "the system", because from their viewpoint there really is no herd and no system...the world that they see is the only one that could possibly exist, so it would be worse than stupid to consider any other possibility.

      While my kneejerk response to the question "are you a sherson?" would be "of course not!", I have to admit that after a minute or so of reflecting I can identify attributes within myself or a couple of actions within the past week that I would label as "sheepish". The fact that I can identify those things as undesirable and make an effort to rid myself of that sort of behavior counts for something, I think, but am I 100% free of the thing that I mock? If I'm honest, no. Are any of us, come to that? Maybe, but I think that's a different and longer discussion...

      The point that I wanted to make in my original offhand post was badly-phrased. The essential message I wanted to convey was "while it's possible that a person may have to be fairly bright to understand one joke or another, it seems more important to me that the person in question have interests that lie in the direction of computers and programming and OSS (basically, the typical Slashdot-reading geek stereotype) than the average member of society. for instance, here's an example of someone who I consider to be both fairly bright and non-standard in her interests, and she still doesn't get the jokes (let's ignore for now the discussion of how many bona fide 'jokes' get posted on a particular topic)."...I was just impressively careless with my choice of words.
      So those are my thoughts in a nutshell. I could (and should) elaborate on this later to clarify things because I'm sure that half of this post makes me look like a babbling moron, but it's a lot more condensed & to the point than my earlier effort.

      --
      "Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix"- Kieren O'Shaughnessy
  4. 99.84% pure pork fat by brokenwndw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    99.84 percent of all incoming mail is spam

    Is that one of the 86.55% of all statistics which are made up on the spot?

    1. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by Elecore · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe that company is Microsoft, and they classify all support e-mails as "SPAM".

    2. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by Timesprout · · Score: 3, Informative

      Vbug, a Microsoft developer support company based in the UK with just six employees, received around 720,000 e-mails messages in a month, 99.84 percent of which were spam.

      No its the figure for one company for one month.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    3. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by Pxtl · · Score: 1

      Its a developer support company, which means they have very, very public e-mail addresses. Plus, they probably include their support requiests as SPAM.

    4. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Funny

      So if i made a trivial spam detection program that just marks ALL as spam will have a 99.84 sucess ratio? mmm maybe i just need to patent that idea.

    5. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by brokenwndw · · Score: 1

      Goodness gracious, folks, it's a joke. An old one at that. You must be one of the three in five Slashdotters who don't get jokes.

    6. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by Otter · · Score: 1
      99.84 percent of all incoming mail is spam

      I guess that Nuclear Elephant guy is going to be "architecting" another seething response about how no normal email account gets over 60% spam, and anyone who says otherwise is either a moron or is trying to make CRM114 look bad.

    7. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the answer to your question is "yes".

    8. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by Surt · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Your sig sounds more like a purposely than a randomly.

      Not that I disagree with your purpose.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    9. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by Pieroxy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given the "+5, Insightful", I'd say there are at least 4 moderators that don't get it either.

    10. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by ColPanek · · Score: 1
      You must be one of the three in five Slashdotters who don't get jokes.

      or one of the three kinds of people in this world: Those who are good at math, and those who aren't.

      Anyway, I just began an experiment of my own two hours ago, disabling all filters to see just how much spam is coming in, and thus far I've gotten 746 spam and three legitimate emails, or 99.6% spam. This test is only two hours old, but still. If you own your own domain names and have seen the exponential escalation in spam to manufactured addresses in the last month or two, you know what I'm talking about.

      --
      Freedom's just another word for nothing left Zulus
    11. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by mikesmind · · Score: 1

      The latest internal statistic at my company on this is that 52% of the incoming email is SPAM.

      --
      www.mikesmind.com - www.daddyworkathome.com - www.freetofarm.org - www.tenfoottable.com
    12. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by nulltransfer · · Score: 1

      This sounds about right, actually. 0.16% of 720,000 is 1152 non-spam e-mails in a month, which turns out to be roughly 37-38 in a day. That's a reasonable number for a 6-employee company...

      --

      My dog ate my sig
    13. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by LuxFX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      99.84 percent of all incoming mail is spam

      Is that one of the 86.55% of all statistics which are made up on the spot?


      Actually, that's the closest statistics I've ever seen to the percentage of spam that I'm measuring -- which is 98.86% This comes from me keeping statistics on my spam for the last 8 months or so. Every time I see one of those 50% or 60% statements, I get green with envy, wishing I just had 60% of my email be spam....

      --
      Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
    14. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by KilobyteKnight · · Score: 1

      Is that one of the 86.55% of all statistics which are made up on the spot?

      No, it's part of the other 25% of statistics that don't add up.

      --
      When will Windows be ready for the desktop?
    15. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by VertigoAce · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I think he means randomly as in he'll do it sometimes and ignore it at other times. It's like a random security check at the airport. It's done for a particular reason, but not everyone gets picked, so it is done randomly.

    16. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by jcuervo · · Score: 1
      Is that one of the 86.55% of all statistics which are made up on the spot?
      [root@joel root]# zcat /var/log/maillog.1.gz | perl spamstats.pl -q
      33.3% spam, 61.0% ham, 5.7% virus, 19032 total
      (That 61% is just spam that SpamAssassin didn't pick up. :-))
      --
      Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
    17. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by nacturation · · Score: 1, Informative

      Think about it. His sig is self-referential.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    18. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by Mwongozi · · Score: 1

      If that statistic is accurate, that means they received an average of 619 valid e-mails, per person, per day. That's over one per minute, per person.

      I don't believe them.

    19. Re:99.84% pure pork fat by Alexis+de+Torquemada · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's one of the 17.8361548928847326% of statistics that give a false sense of precision. Or one of the 42000% of statistics that are grossly exaggerated.

  5. sick days. by Guano_Jim · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bah. It's a proven fact that 40% of sick days are taken on Mondays and Fridays. Why should my PC be any different?

    1. Re:sick days. by nebaz · · Score: 0

      You make this sound like it is statistically significant. Two of the five normal working days in the week are monday or friday, 2 of 5 is 40%. It would seem more likely that that % would be higher.

      --
      Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
    2. Re:sick days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i would like to see this proof.

      given totally random choice of the 5 days, 2 of 5 would be 40%, but given the option of parting early friday or late sunday (then hangover monday) i think that would shift it more to monday/friday.
      but then there are those 3 day weekends, that with a well placed sick day become a 4 day weekend.

    3. Re:sick days. by Elecore · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think he meant that as a joke...

    4. Re:sick days. by AnonymousKev · · Score: 5, Informative

      The moderators really need a -1: Didn't Get The Cultural Reference option. I believe the parent was refering to a Dilbert cartoon (Dilbert used to "40% fact" to alarm the Pointy-Haired Boss.)

      --
      Anonymous Kev
      Proudly posting as AC since 1997
      (Finally got a dang account in 2004)
    5. Re:sick days. by nebaz · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh. (looks sheepish). Ok.

      --
      Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
    6. Re:sick days. by strictnein · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not only did you not get the joke, the mods didn't either.

      Real statistics show that people are ~ 1.5 times more likely to call in sick on Monday and ~ 2 times more likely to call in sick on Friday, as opposed to Tuesday-Thursday.

      That figures out to roughly:
      Monday: 23.5%
      Tuesday: 15.5%
      Wednesday: 15.5%
      Thursday: 15.5%
      Friday: 30%

    7. Re:sick days. by Surt · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually it's exactly 40% (for businesses operating on the standard M-F business week) and it is a proven fact. You just have to be careful about how the fact is stated so that it's clear you're taking the percentage of M,F from M,Tu,W,Th,F.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  6. Should we be suprised? by Collestonpie13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What would you excpect with most corparations running Windows adn IE?

    --
    Coffee, you can sleep when you're dead!
    1. Re:Should we be suprised? by bbdd · · Score: 5, Interesting

      one of the networks i manage runs windows and ie, and if it had a downtime of 9 days per pc, i would be replaced in short order. with 30 client machines, that would be at least one machine down for 270 days!

      the last machine down was for 2 days, due to needing a new part that i didn't keep on the shelf. (can't stock them all!) i ended up just replacing the whole machine, since i couldn't get the part faster. thats the only machine that's been down for longer than an hour during the past year (maybe longer). and, it was due to hardware failure, not windows/ie.

      the windows risk is manageable, but it does require extra cost and work to mantain. in this case, the company is willing to tighten things down to keep the machines running well and keep the less-experienced users out of trouble. call it big-brother if you want, to them its good policy to keep business running.

    2. Re:Should we be suprised? by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would expect them to have IT staff who knew what the fuck they were doing. 9 days of sick time per PC? This is regoddamndiculous. If a PC in our office has even ONE DAY of downtime, it's a problem.

      But we're a small business. We don't have a single machine to spare, and most of our staff is smart enough to reimage their own shit. Many corporate offices have a ton of extra machines thanks to downsizing. I suspect these numbers were skewed thusly: the IT staff had their PCs in a sort of queue, with newly imaged machines ready to go at all times. Somebody gets a virus, he gets a new computer immediately. Meanwhile, his virus ridden machine goes at the bottom of the "rebuild these when you have time" pile. If you were to combine all the time those PCs were sick, yeah, I could see that approaching 9 days.

      Wait, no I can't. I can't get over this statistic. NINE DAYS to fix a dead machine? It only took 3 days round trip for Apple to replace my laptop's logic board and screen!

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    3. Re:Should we be suprised? by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you lock things down enough, there ceases to be any point in your users having PCs.

      May as well go back to thin clients operating off a mainframe.

      --
      The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
    4. Re:Should we be suprised? by geoffspear · · Score: 1
      Umm, the 9 days was an average, and it didn't say it was per incident.

      Slashdot really needs to hire some statisticians who know what the fuck they're doing, to prevent comments like this from happening.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    5. Re:Should we be suprised? by bbdd · · Score: 1

      heehee, they already do, too, in the form of green-screen terminals, for the users who don't need pc apps. hey, its been running for years. if it ain't broke...

    6. Re:Should we be suprised? by strictnein · · Score: 1

      Coffee, you can sleep when your dead!

      Can't we at least get our sigs correct? It's "you're dead", not "your dead".

      Coffee, you can sleep with your dead! would be correct, but disturbing, and I wouldn't want to meat "Coffee".

    7. Re:Should we be suprised? by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      I work for one of the larger organization (I think the numbers around 130,000 employees world wide) and I've had my share of small companies (the smallest around 250 employees). I can't ever recall PC's being down for hardware issues for more than a couple hours for a single incident and the number of incidents per PC over a year still wouldn't account for an average of 9 days. I can see including software related issues (virus, driver conflicts, user screw up, etc...) but not SPAM into the "9 days". SPAM is an issue regardless of the OS/platform and should not be included. If they include SPAM handling, why not include time a person does non-work related activies (browsing the Internet, posting to Slashdot, playing mine sweeper) into the "sick time".

      If only counting hardware and operating system issues, the count should be a lot less than 9 days average. With proper support, PC's are probably closer to 2 or 3 days downtime (and I'm trying to be conservative, more likely it's less than a day).

    8. Re:Should we be suprised? by daft_one · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah... Actually, most of their machines are down only about an hour, tops. It's that one that's been down since 1982 which skews the numbers!

    9. Re:Should we be suprised? by dasmegabyte · · Score: 1

      I don't think I should have to go into depth of the nature of statistical mathematics in order to express my outrage. Yes, it says it's an average. This means that if many machines are down less than a day per incident, enough machines are down long enough or often enough to raise the average to 9. Which is far worse than having an average downtime of 9 days. If it is taking you more than 2 days to a) remove a virus or b) reinstall system software, you are doing something wrong. And if it's happening more than once or twice a year...you've got a REAL problem. What's the old adage? Fool me once, shame on you, but fool me twice, shame on me? Fix your firewall and get some goddamn virus software -- an average of NINE DAYS per PC per year is embarrassing.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    10. Re:Should we be suprised? by spooky_nerd · · Score: 4, Informative

      That sounds great, but as a desktop support drone at a major company (40,000 people) I can tell you it doesn't always work out that way. Here's what really happens:
      The user has a 4 year old CPx laptop the company won't replace because it doesn't have the budget (unless you're a director or higher). The OS gets fried from spyware, adware, viruses, etc. All the spares are ancient systems too.
      Backups and restores take longer because no one seems to keep files on any network servers. The 350 MB limit on storage space doesn't help. Those 4 year old hard drives sometimes fail, and we don't have a budget for data recovery, so it's up to desktop support to make a best effort.
      Systems are often out of warranty, so we have to scavange parts from reclaimed systems. If we can't fix a system, then we have to order another reclaim in from the warehouse, which takes at least a day.
      We have a couple loaners, but they won't have the user's files or custom programs. If it's not too busy we can transfer data from the old hard drive pretty quickly. But if there are a lot of tickets, take a number and expect to wait a few hours.
      All that adds up to a lot of downtime over a year. I had one poor guy who went through 3 laptops in 2 weeks because of this. By then I just gave him a loaner to keep since we where getting DOA reclaims.
      Oh, and as for viruses, our team here is pretty good, but we did have one virus where we had to go desk-to-desk with a patch CD. Some people where down for the entire day.

    11. Re:Should we be suprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What would you excpect with most corparations running Windows adn IE?

      Well, a spell-checker would be nice...

    12. Re:Should we be suprised? by pianophile · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't want to meat "Coffee".

      Meeting him/her would be scary, too.

      --

      'Your brain is God.' -- Dr. Timothy Leary
    13. Re:Should we be suprised? by Collestonpie13 · · Score: 1

      i think im lost...is this english class or /.?

      --
      Coffee, you can sleep when you're dead!
    14. Re:Should we be suprised? by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      So, with server-client becoming the norm, why would that be bad? Works well for Fargo, FL, USA. The admins claim that they have plenty of time for forward, strategic planning instead of crisis management.

    15. Re:Should we be suprised? by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      9 days a year is just a little over 4 hours a week.

    16. Re:Should we be suprised? by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      Actually, I used 24 hours for that, but it's possible (RTFA?) that they used and eight hout workday for this, in which case, it's only about 1.4 hours per week downtime, which I find quite possible.

    17. Re:Should we be suprised? by dasmegabyte · · Score: 1

      But hardly a useful statistic. I spend more than 1.4 hours per week getting coffee and going to the bathroom. Heck, if your computer takes 5 minutes to boot up every morning, that's more than two days of downtime every year. It's completely tolerable. Probably doesn't result in a dollar of lost revenue. But the statistic SURE looks scary, doesn't it?

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    18. Re:Should we be suprised? by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      I was just responding to the rash of comments that this was impossible, to which I countered that it could be easily reached, especially in light of my second comment.

  7. and the avg Mac or Linux system? by ezavada · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How many days were they "absent".

    I bet it was a lot fewer than 9, especially if most of those "absences" were because of viruses.

    1. Re:and the avg Mac or Linux system? by Seth+Finklestein · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I migrated a large office to Mac OS X last month. Unfortunately, the stupid cluebies peppered me with questions like "HOW I USE MY OUTLOOK NOW????" and "i cant see my explorer were did u put it."

      We had to spend nine days training these clueless morons about how to use Mac OS X, despite the fact that Mac OS X is substantially easier to use than Windows.

      I still laugh every time I get a message saying "MY FREND SENT ME A GAME BUT I CLICED IT AND IT DIDNT WORK CAN U HELP ME" from some retard in finance.

      Sincerely,
      Seth Finklestein
      IT Support Specialist

      --
      I'm not Seth Finkelstein. I still speak the truth.
    2. Re:and the avg Mac or Linux system? by SYSS+Mouse · · Score: 1

      But for Linux, it is harder for an average user to "give birth" and "raise" a Linux system, even though it never gget sick.

    3. Re:and the avg Mac or Linux system? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make this "Insightful," please. I get the same hilariously moronified comments from lusers ever since we upgraded them from Winblows XP to Gentoo. "HOW DO I INVITE PPL TO AN OUTLOOK MTG?" Please. Open Source has employed far superior methodology in designing its thousands of PIM applications.

    4. Re:and the avg Mac or Linux system? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      But for Linux, it is harder for an average user to "give birth" and "raise" a Linux system, even though it never gget sick.

      That's why we need the pain meds for Linux. Just catch a needle in the spine and you'll never remember what happened after that.

    5. Re:and the avg Mac or Linux system? by Corporate+Gadfly · · Score: 1
      and the avg Mac or Linux system? How many days were they "absent".(emphasis mine)
      I don't know if I am an average Linux user, but my uptime is approaching 100 days. This is my full-time development system (and I have all the latest software).

      No, those stats aren't made up. And yes, this is a Gentoo system running ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" (Gentoo's version of Debian unstable -- sort of).
      --
      Corporate Gadfly
      Jonathan Archer: the most beaten up Enterprise captain in Star Trek history
    6. Re:and the avg Mac or Linux system? by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 1

      We had to spend nine days training these clueless morons about how to use Mac OS X, despite the fact that Mac OS X is substantially easier to use than Windows.

      "substantially easier to use" does not directly translate to "automatically intuitive," especially if the newbie has never touched a Mac. I've played with Mac OS X once -- will you call me a moron for not automatically knowing where a file or program is accessed? Put me in front of a Longhorn-based box, and I'll probably still need a bit of training just to get used to the changes. AFter that, I'll be golden.

      I certainly hope, should that day come, I won't have to deal with a snobby, self-important arse like yourself.

      --

      Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
    7. Re:and the avg Mac or Linux system? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh, WTH, I'll weigh in...

      My experiences over the past decade:

      Netware: 200+ days is easy (file and print only)
      OS/2 desktop: 2-3 weeks wasn't too hard
      Win 3.x: reboot twice daily for luck
      Win95: reboot day or so
      Win98: daily, maybe every few days
      NT v4 workstation: weekly
      NT v4 server: lasting 30 days is an accomplishment
      Win2k workstation: weekly or every 2 weeks
      Win2k server: 30-60 days and then you have to patch again
      WinXP: 2-3 weeks isn't too hard
      Solaris: 200+ days is easy, except for squid

      The WinXP laptop that I'm using at the moment has been up for around 12 days... which is about when the last MS patch came out that forced a reboot.

  8. OS's by blackmonday · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I didn't RTFA (this is /.), but I wonder what the breakdown is for diferrent operating systems: Linux, Mac OSX, OS 9, Windows flavors.

    Where I work the primary reason for PC's going down is hardware, not software.

    1. Re:OS's by stratjakt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here and everywhere else too. Most businesses with a firewall and properly configured network don't have problems with the virus' or trojans.

      The problems are user incompetence, when some propellerhead tries to "tweak" the desktop on his workstation and winds up with everything all borked. Or the neat freaks who obsessively "clean" their hard drives of all those useless .vxd and .dll files. Or reconfigure their modems or network adapters, etc, etc..

      Still, 9 days a year sounds hokey to me. Getting a virus or trojan shouldn't even take the system down a full day, such things are generally easily correctable. Of course, your average cubicle jockey will use it as an excuse to do nothing that day.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:OS's by lacrymology.com · · Score: 5, Funny

      LINUX is that geeky guy that never takes days off, but instead sits in his lonely office with the lights turned off pounding out incredible amounts of code in record time.

      OSX is that hot geek woman that tries really hard to show everyone that she's not just a piece of meat, but instead has a brain. She never takes off either.

      OS9 is that old guy on the edge of retiring who doesn't give a $hit about doing the job. He goes to the doctor alot because of cruft, complains about new technology, and talks about the old days to anyone that'll listen. He takes off quite a bit to visit the urologist.

      WINDOWS is that guy who managed to get far in the company by taking pictures of the president of the company with a goat. He doesn't really do a lot on his own, but instead steals most of his ideas from the hot chick and the old guy and presents them to his superiors. He takes off all the time to play golf, visit his mistress, and to sleep off hang-overs.

      -m

      --

      #
      # Modus Ponens
      #
    3. Re:OS's by haystor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The virus scanners on the computer I used at my last job used up 3-5 hours of CPU time per 8 hours I was logged on. This means viruses and their solution consumed a minimum of 37% of the CPU hours my computer was capable. Of course running Lotus Notes used up the rest, and I just sat there for a year.

      --
      t
    4. Re:OS's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is funny.

    5. Re:OS's by dylan_- · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      You forgot:

      DOS that guy who has two machine, one running windows that he never touches, and one still running DOS that he does his Real Work on. Mutters under his breath about the good old days when they still had the Novell network in place before that upgrade ("Hah!") to NT...

      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
    6. Re:OS's by Procrastin8er · · Score: 1

      Sounds like it would be a lot more fun being the "WINDOWS" guy.

      --
      Slashdot - Where the slash is most definitely to the left.
    7. Re:OS's by NeedleSurfer · · Score: 1

      LINUX is that geeky guy that never takes days off, but instead sits in his lonely office with the lights turned off pounding out incredible amounts of code in record time.

      Strangely enough all of that code has the purpose of writing other code like some neverending perfection circle where the holy grail is code that write code faster, more stable, scalable, code, more code... :-|~~~~~~~

      not to mention that he is paid with some sort of governement grant and is happy to work for "free"

      ;-)

    8. Re:OS's by Paulrothrock · · Score: 1
      One more thing about Windows:
      He is constantly saying how the Linux guy is overpaid because you gave him $50,000 up front and you're only paying the Windows guy $10,000 a month.

      /me is looking forward to going home to my smart, sexy geek woman. And my fiance, too...

      --
      I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
    9. Re:OS's by NaugaHunter · · Score: 1

      Getting a virus or trojan shouldn't even take the system down a full day, such things are generally easily correctable. Of course, your average cubicle jockey will use it as an excuse to do nothing that day.

      If you were running a large machine shop and one of your assembly lines breaks down, would you really want the 3rd shifter item loader to start tearing it apart looking for the problem? In most companies a computer is a tool your employees use to perform their actual job, and they have a separate staff (internal or outsourced) to handle problems with those tools. In fact, in most corporations probably discourage users from attempting to fix things themselves, since most have little to no training in this area. (Yes, nearly everyone has computers now, but nearly everyone also have cars. That doesn't make them mechanics.)

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
    10. Re:OS's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      OSX is that hot geek woman

      What we need is a way to integrate this feature with Exposé. Mmm, F11...

    11. Re:OS's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The bottleneck for the virus scanner is usually the disk, not the CPU. Still makes stuff slow, but something that needs the CPU and memory but no disk will still run fast.

    12. Re:OS's by haystor · · Score: 1

      The time report on task manager after a full day of scanning would be 3-5 hours total. I agree that the bottleneck was the disk which means my loss of resources was much higher than 3-5 hours out of each day.

      --
      t
    13. Re:OS's by Moby-One+GNUbie · · Score: 1

      The average is also driven up by company IT policy. A company worth its salt keeps a slush reserve of a few desktops that it can swap out with broken machines. Combine this with the fact that many IT departments are overworked, and you get a result where a single machine might actually be out of commission for days or even weeks. However, since there's another one to take its place, I don't think there's as much of a loss as the numbers might indicate.

      --
      "Wherever you go, there you are."
    14. Re:OS's by Phillup · · Score: 1

      I'll take the hot chick with a brain.

      Thanks!

      --

      --Phillip

      Can you say BIRTH TAX
    15. Re:OS's by srenker · · Score: 1
      WINDOWS is that guy who managed to get far in the company by taking pictures of the president of the company with a goat.

      With goatse would be more entertaining...

      P.S. I'm using Tablet PC SP2 RC2 (bite me) and it appears that goatse is in the handwriting recognizer's dictionary! (No I didn't put it there)

      --
      My new /. login is fabu10u$.
    16. Re:OS's by dustmite · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Still, 9 days a year sounds hokey to me. I would say a badly infected system (lots of adware, spyware etc) can easily take up to a day, especially if you have to install service packs etc. on a system, which takes long just sitting and waiting. But you're right, even if 1 day per incident per machine, 9 such 'incidents' per year sounds like a lot.

      But you've missed an important point: the problem with the "the latest Windows worm" hitting your company is that when it does, it tends to hit BIG, i.e. normally nearly everyone gets infected at once (e.g. because it hits before the Windows Updates and/or AV updates for the exploit/virus are available). Now (for obvious economic reasons) the IT department of any company is only staffed sufficiently to handle day-to-day average workload, not hundreds of systems going down at once. So suddenly the IT department is hugely overloaded, a handful of people trying to clean hundreds of infected machines, just not possible, so now 1 day easily becomes 3 or 4 days to get round to all the machines. So now it only takes two major Windows worms per year to reach 7 or 8 days, plus another day or two on average other normal downtime, re-install time etc.

    17. Re:OS's by dustmite · · Score: 1

      A process blocked waiting for I/O requests to complete does not consume CPU time (obviously, because it is blocked), and that time waiting is not tallied with the "CPU time" shown in e.g. the Task Manager or top. AV scanners are usually only CPU intensive, they *appear* to be I/O intensive because they "happen to" run their checks whenever files are being accessed, so they slow down all file accesses, but not by increasing I/O, rather they're "studying the data" that is being read/written by other programs. Theoretically they don't even need to do any disk I/O at all if they have their signatures in memory, because all they're doing is 'catching' the file read/write requests of other processes, at which time they can analyse the file data already in memory.

    18. Re:OS's by ednopantz · · Score: 1

      because it hits before the Windows Updates and/or AV updates for the exploit/virus are available)

      Actually, it usually hits seven months after the patch is available, but people don't get it together to patch. These virus/worm writers aren't Lex Luthor, they are chumps who start with the patch and work backwards to the vulnerability.

  9. Not really sick days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    These PCs are spending more and more time binge drinking on the weekends. Macs are notorious for ending up dancing with a lampshade on its head.

    1. Re:Not really sick days by wankledot · · Score: 1

      I'm really curious where the whole "lampshade on the head" reference came from. Is there some movie or book that started this idea? It seems like an oddly well-known thing.

      --
      My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
    2. Re:Not really sick days by bplipschitz · · Score: 1

      I'm really curious where the whole "lampshade on the head" reference came from. Is there some movie or book that started this idea? It seems like an oddly well-known thing.

      My Mother.

    3. Re:Not really sick days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Macs are notorious for ending up dancing with a lampshade on its head.

      I can't speak for the other Apple product lines, but the only reason the iMacs would do that is because it goes with the rest of the lamp-shape motif. What can I say, they like to coordinate their accessories.

  10. Time well spent? by SIGALRM · · Score: 2, Insightful

    with one business reporting that 99.84 percent of all incoming mail is spam

    They seem to have expended time/resources to perform such a precise calculation; perhaps it would have been better spent researching and implementing spam filters.

    --
    Sigs cause cancer.
    1. Re:Time well spent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They seem to have expended time/resources to perform such a precise calculation; perhaps it would have been better spent researching and implementing spam filters.

      I would say that the precise calculation indicates that they do have an antispam solutioin. I really doubt a real person is going to look at every single email and count them for this purpose.

      THey only say that was the incoming number, not the number actually deliverd to users...

  11. Yeah its always taking sickies by Timesprout · · Score: 5, Funny

    My PC just cant handle its liqor at all. Damn Mac boozes all night and gets up in the morning no problem though. Its killing me trying to keep up.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:Yeah its always taking sickies by proj_2501 · · Score: 1

      Macs take Chaser?

    2. Re:Yeah its always taking sickies by TRS80NT · · Score: 1
      I thought alcohol was a Gateway drug!

      --
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
    3. Re:Yeah its always taking sickies by recursiv · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yeah, they do. I can't believe you didn't know. Seriously. You must be dumb or something.

      --
      I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
    4. Re:Yeah its always taking sickies by proj_2501 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      do you exist to be humorless?

    5. Re:Yeah its always taking sickies by recursiv · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I occasionally serve a few other purposes also. Why? Do you also?

      --
      I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
  12. This is a poor test... by marnargulus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the survey only 2,500 people were polled. That's an insanely small number to post concerning such a wide spread thing as computers. That is like taking a group of 100 people in New York and using that as a representitive sample. An online poll could have gathered more like 50,000 on a well traveled site.

    1. Re:This is a poor test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the population for a survey is well chosen, a small survey will be more accurate than a random poll (as most online polls are).

    2. Re:This is a poor test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah, sure, 50,000 responses, but it would've been a self-selecting sample. Booo to that.

    3. Re:This is a poor test... by dylan_- · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not really. 2500 is plenty people; what's more important is that the sample is representative (of whatever group you want to talk about). As long as your sample is representative then 250,000 people will not give you significantly better results than 2500.

      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
    4. Re:This is a poor test... by pclminion · · Score: 4, Informative
      An online poll could have gathered more like 50,000 on a well traveled site.

      That's a bogus way to conduct a poll. By definition, you are only getting data from people who go to that site.

      It's called a "self-selecting sample" and in statistics it's a no-no.

      2,500 randomly selected sample points will give very accurate results, and in fact a lot of poll-takers would be envious of such a large sample.

    5. Re:This is a poor test... by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      2500 folks who use Yahoo email as their primary email and would bother to respond to this questionaire.

      So it's basically a sample of people who don't know nothing about computers.

      And nowhere in the article does it explain where they get this "the average PC is teh broke 9 days a year" business. Methinks they pulled it from their ass.

      As for IT folks, their JOB is to clean viruses and fix PCs, so its the inverse - sounds like they actually DO WORK 9 days a year. No wonder they're all outsourced. I wouldn't keep a department on salary who only work 9 days a year.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    6. Re:This is a poor test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > An online poll could have gathered more like 50,000 on a well traveled site.

      'Cause we know all the online polls are sooooo acurate, right?

      I'm not sure which is more an indication of /. lameness this statement itself or the fact it is currently rated as 4, Insightful......

    7. Re:This is a poor test... by Frequency+Domain · · Score: 3, Informative
      In the survey only 2,500 people were polled. That's an insanely small number to post concerning such a wide spread thing as computers. That is like taking a group of 100 people in New York and using that as a representitive sample. An online poll could have gathered more like 50,000 on a well traveled site.
      That's not how statistics works. Online polls are not random samples, they're self-selected, so results obtained in the manner you propose would almost certainly be inaccurate. Conversely, if you have a random sample then 2500 people are more than enough. A random sample is where each member of the population has an equal likelihood of being selected, or equivalently, the likelihood of getting respondents of a certain type is equal to the proportion of that type in the population.

      Contrary to popular belief, the sample sizze required for a given level of statistical precision is NOT some big percentage of the population if sampling is random. Think of having a medical test on a blood sample. Since blood is well mixed, small amounts drawn from anywhere in your body are representative of the whole amount. There's no need to take 20 or 30% of your blood, nor to spike you all over your anatomy, they just need enough to work with. Thank goodness!

    8. Re:This is a poor test... by dylan_- · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The article is a news article. They very rarely explain the methodology behind a survey, but since they do talk about a company with its own domain I suspect they didn't just talk to people who "use Yahoo email as their primary email".
      And nowhere in the article does it explain where they get this "the average PC is teh broke 9 days a year" business. Methinks they pulled it from their ass.
      ...or maybe they pulled it from the report from the research company?

      Actually, had a quick look at your other posts to this thread. Looks like you're trolling again...oh well...
      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
    9. Re:This is a poor test... by seafortn · · Score: 2, Informative

      And for anyone who's curious, this 7 days v. 9 days statistic seems to be significant by chi-squared analysis (yes, I did waste the time to check)

    10. Re:This is a poor test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That's a bogus way to conduct a poll"
      Sounds like slashdot polls

    11. Re:This is a poor test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2,500 randomly selected sample points will give very accurate results, and in fact a lot of poll-takers would be envious of such a large sample.

      Are you saying they'd have "poll envy"?

    12. Re:This is a poor test... by Piobaire · · Score: 1

      When I took stats, a larger sample size would reduce the error percentage.

    13. Re:This is a poor test... by pclminion · · Score: 2, Interesting
      When I took stats, a larger sample size would reduce the error percentage.

      The error percentage is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether you can reject or accept the null hypothesis, as determined by a chi-squared significance test.

    14. Re:This is a poor test... by cj79 · · Score: 1
      By definition, you are only getting data from people who go to that site.
      You're also only getting data from people whose computers aren't sick that day.
    15. Re:This is a poor test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just had a really silly thought, think if they did voting based on this principle, just find 50-100 ppl in the US and elect the next president, since they are from each state they are representitive of everyone, why go to the headache of getting everyone's vote if it won't give us significantly better results?

    16. Re:This is a poor test... by moonbender · · Score: 1

      Give it another 20 to 30 years and voter participation will be down to those levels anyway...

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  13. A Tale of woe.. by MosesJones · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm right in with this. So far this year I've had

    2 different PCs

    3 complete PC rebuilds

    No VPN access for 5 months and authentication issues due to an Active Directory migration.

    I work in IT, go knows what the poor buggers who just have to work WITH IT have to put up with.

    As Computing professionals we should all be ashamed of the quality standards that we have allowed, and continue to allow, to be considered a production ready release. Until we have the same standards of excellence that Engineers have in the construction industry we might as well have arts degrees.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:A Tale of woe.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      You work in IT? Sure sounds like you SUCK at it. Mayhaps you're just another paper tiger who figured his crash course at DeVry would net him a six figure income?

      No wonder all you folks are being outsourced to india. 5 PC rebuilds in a year. Yeah, whatever.. Blame MSFT for the "viruses" that make you too stupid to know how to make a clean ghost image that can restore the machine in 5 minutes.

    2. Re:A Tale of woe.. by doublem · · Score: 1

      Until we have the same standards of excellence that Engineers have in the construction industry we might as well have arts degrees.

      Damn, that's a good line. Mind if I snag it as a SIG?

      "If contractors built homes the way programmers build software, the first woodpecker who came along would destroy civilization."

      --
      "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
    3. Re:A Tale of woe.. by Surt · · Score: 1

      Actually, I tend to find the number of days that buildings are not fully functional due to pipe repairs, heating out, ac out, flood damage, etc to be highly comparable to the number of days that my PC has issues.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    4. Re:A Tale of woe.. by Jorgensen · · Score: 1

      If you insist on:

      1. Running the biggest virus magnet OS on the planet
      2. Use an email client/browser with more holes than swiss cheese
      3. Delay updates of patches because the have to be tested internally first. I know; it's a must, but it shouldn't have to be that way
      4. Not use a spam filter that helps filter out email-based viruses (virii?)

      Then you should be ashamed.

      We all know that there are alternatives out there. With free as in freedom. We all make our choices - you can guess what I chose in my company.

      Remember: A person may well be intelligent, but people are generally stupid...

    5. Re:A Tale of woe.. by awkScooby · · Score: 1
      As Computing professionals we should all be ashamed of the quality standards that we have allowed, and continue to allow, to be considered a production ready release.

      I blame management. If they bought Ford vehicles and suffered the same problems as we get with Microsoft, I can guarantee that they would never buy Ford again. Microsoft screws them over on a regular basis (worms, price hikes, incompatibility issues, etc), and it's heresy to even suggest talking about ditching Microsoft.

    6. Re:A Tale of woe.. by jtev · · Score: 1

      4. Not use a spam filter that helps filter out email-based viruses (virii?) hmm, since virus is a collective noun in lattin maybe it should just ve virus. 1 virus, 2 virus, 3 virus, etec.

      --
      That which is done from love exists beyond good and evil
  14. Paid Sick Days? by scoser · · Score: 5, Funny

    If my office computer doesn't use its sick days, can it use that money for upgrades?

    1. Re:Paid Sick Days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YES! Especially if you are regularly dropping money into it's specially designed slots each day/month.

    2. Re:Paid Sick Days? by value_added · · Score: 2, Informative

      They're like Slashdot mod points. Use 'em or lose 'em.

  15. In the UK yes... by jaghatarjankare · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the average employee was out sick seven days a year

    Oh really. The average Scandinavian is out thirty days a year and the per capita GNP is still higher. I find that figure way too low, considering the 'socialist' system in the UK that's even survived Maggie.

    1. Re:In the UK yes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Oh really. The average Scandinavian is out thirty days a year and the per capita GNP is still higher. I find that figure way too low, considering the 'socialist' system in the UK that's even survived Maggie.
      And this has what to do with computer down time due to viruses?
    2. Re:In the UK yes... by Nexus+Seven · · Score: 1

      Err, what "socialist" system?

    3. Re:In the UK yes... by Radon+Knight · · Score: 1
      The average Scandinavian is out thirty days a year and the per capita GNP is still higher

      I suspect that fact is largely skewed because, what, 12 people live in Scandinavia, and they have a boatload of oil?

      In all seriousness, though, it's not hard to have a really high GNP when you're Norway. A lot of oil and very few people does make the GNP high.

    4. Re:In the UK yes... by beakburke · · Score: 2, Informative

      You forget that sick days and vacation days are separate.

      --
      ----- Question authority, but not ours. Hate the man, but we're not him.
    5. Re:In the UK yes... by Eklypz · · Score: 1

      Lots of sick brits. I think I have taken 2 sick days in 3 years. I can't recollect my fellow employees ever taking more than 3 in a year. In fact, if you take 3 days (seperately) in 4 months you will get written up! I would be curious what average American sick days taken are.

      --
      Life is everything but nothing.
    6. Re:In the UK yes... by nacturation · · Score: 1
      • the average employee was out sick seven days a year
      Oh really. The average Scandinavian is out thirty days a year...

      Out *sick* 30 days per year? 50 working weeks, 5 days a week, that's 250 working days. That's 12% of the year that they're sick. You're saying that they're sick 1 day out of every 8 days? That IS sick!
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  16. Even if that is true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    My computer will still get promoted before I am!

  17. This sounds way high by L.+VeGas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Nine days?

    That's the problem with averages. They can be calculated in so many ways. I know that I've never had a workstation down for nine days out of a year.

    1. Re:This sounds way high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? My statistics book has only one for average:

      n
      Sigma x_i/n = Average (Mean)
      i=1

      What other ways do you know?

  18. Variety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'd be out sick more often too if 99.84 percent of what I ate each day was spam.

    1. Re:Variety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard 99.84% of what you ate each day was sperm.

  19. Do Not Spam Lists Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Why is the proposal for a Do Not Spam list being based upon the cleartext version of the email address, rather than something reasonable like the MD5 checksum of the email address?

  20. Wuh Oh by lhpineapple · · Score: 5, Funny

    Looks like the machines are beating us! Come on folks, we've got some catching up to do!

  21. Unreal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    9 days?? I mean, I slam MS as much as the next guy, but the AVERAGE is 9 days???

    How long does it take a tech to reimage a PC?

    Or even reload an OS??

    Are these shops with no Virus Protection at all???

    That number is so far out as to be totally unreal...

    Heck, I don't use anti-Virus software at home, just safe email practices and Firefox instead of IE, and I have yet to get an infection (Deleted plenty of attempts tho..); and my PC has never been out of service more than the few hours it takes to run a housecall scan for Virus checks..

    desiv

    1. Re:Unreal... by the_rev_matt · · Score: 1

      Well, average reimage time at the gov't agency I'm at is 3 days. That varies, though. Gave them a laptop in March, got it back in June.

      OS reloads take longer, because you've got anywhere from 2-5 days before you get the box back, and then usually a whole day reinstalling all your tools and apps that aren't part of the Common Computing Environment build (IBM Websphere Studio, for example, which takes 2+ hours to install on a 2Ghz P4 with 1G of RAM).

      All machines run here run AV software and are updated nightly and have "scan on access" set (and users are not local admins, so they can't undo it).

      In spite of all that, we still get virus infections on occassion. I would estimate our average machine downtime in the group I'm in as 5 days/year, however.

      --
      this is getting old and so are you

      blog

    2. Re:Unreal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well here its...

      1. Call to report your computer is acting wacky and get a number.
      2. Wait (can be anywhere from minutes to hours)
      3. Someone shows up to verify your system is acting wacky.
      4. If your system is heavy (like mine is since its for data acquisition) wait for the someone to find a cart.
      5. Take the rest of the day off.

    3. Re:Unreal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I love Slashdot.. When I feel like they are going to find out I'm just playing with computers and getting paid, I come here and feel like a computer god! :-)

      We have a smallish shop (1300 PCs). Very rarely are there infections, although it does happen. Machine is cleaned and fixed within the day, always.

      Biggest hit we took was Blaster. Had our firewalls configured to block it, so we got complacent. Didn't rush to patch.. :-( Someone brought in a laptop.

      It hit about 1/5th of our machines. 90% were fixed that day/night. Got the rest of the stragglers the next day.

      Our average PC downtime, considering over 1000 PCs and most stay clean, would be in the hours at most, and I'd wager the average might be under an hour for the whole year. (Definately was for the year before Blaster. :-)

      We have a base image that takes under an hour to re-image and Novell's ZEN redeploys apps and settings when the user needs them.

      If a problem on a PC takes more than an hour to fix, it makes more sense to re-image it.

      Thanx for making me feel great!!! :-)

      desiv

  22. Did the submitter RTFA? by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is nothing in the article that says the survey was for PCs in workplaces.

    It just says "A survey of 2,500 UK e-mail users found that 70 percent of users had been infected by a virus in the past year." It then relates that to average UK worker sick days. Nothing says the PC's were in the workplace.

    Which of course makes MUCH more sense. If the average PC atany workplace I know of was down for 9 days a year heads would roll. That's insane. Average PCs at my company are down maybe a fraction of a percent due to viruses because there are professionals making sure it stays that way.

    So this article is basically "70% of random HOME users were infected in a year."
    Businesses seem to have been asked only about spam.

    Doesn't seem like news at all.

    --

    Operator, give me the number for 911!
  23. Chapter 7 or 11 to the rescue by bstadil · · Score: 1
    one business reporting that 99.84 percent of all incoming mail is spam.

    What do you think the compency level is in this organization on everything else they do?

    Good news is they will not have this problem for much long. Chapter 7 is a very efficient Spam eliminator

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  24. People Paid More Than PCs by zhangyong · · Score: 1

    This how PCs respond to this article. "OK, You started to count the absentee rate of PC. When will you start to compare the salary you paid to your human emplyees?" "Sure 99.84 percent of all incoming mail is spam, because human can't read what machine write, and machine can't read human write."

  25. Do I hear -- An "Apple" a day keeps by vijaya_chandra · · Score: 4, Funny

    you healthy, wealthy and wise!?!

    Hey! No I don't mean the shiny colourful thing on my desk

    1. Re:Do I hear -- An "Apple" a day keeps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hey! No I don't mean the shiny colourful thing on my desk

      Still not very specific. I see an Apple on my desk here, but am using a PC.

      Is it an apple Apple or grape Apple? Crap; getting confused.
  26. It has to be more than just nine days by upsidedown_duck · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...the average PC was inoperable due to a virus nine days a year.

    Do they include all sources for down time or just the PC? For example, a PC can go down due to a local virus/worm issue, or it can go down because an important server on the network is down due to a virus/worm issue. If the e-mail server is overwhelmed with scanning, even if it isn't infected itself, then that is effectively a DOS for every PC on the network (everyone just sits there staring at a blank e-mail client).

    One thing about dealing with SPAM is that filtering programs that quarantine suspicious e-mail and then send another e-mail to the intended recipient are worse than all SPAM itself. I'd rather click "delete" on some obviously rediculous e-mail about fun things to do with animals rather than have to read a cryptic quarantine notice and determine whether I need to contact the system administrator about it.

    --
    -- "Makes Little Debbie look like a pile of puke!" - Moe Szyslak
  27. can someone say backups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Personally, I don't see why anyone should compare sick computer to sick people. While people are basing new computational methods on biological systems, they're not equivalent. Any competent individual should regularly back up their files to a server or another computer. Once the computer calls in "sick", you reload your files and switch to another computer. Obviously, this is rarely the case when a person is out "sick". Even if an individual was to completely document their daily workings, there's still the subtle workings of an individual's thought processes that simply can't be transferred via documentation. And we can't do a brain core dump...yet.

    1. Re:can someone say backups by JRIsidore · · Score: 1

      At first thought it sounds plausible, but you will always miss something on that other computer. Even if it's just your favourite editor, you'll be forced to use a different one which most probably lowers you productivity. It might work if you install exactly the same software on all computers, plus all the libs, header etc. for developers. I never seen such a workplace, every desktop has it's own individual 'note'. A sick computer is IMHO not that much different from a sick employee.

      --
      :w!q
  28. Our computers solved the problem! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They now outsource all thier processor cycles to India to do the work instead. Although we have had to let some computers go because of it. :p

  29. Same General Reasoning by schnarff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You know, when you get right down to it, computer sick days and human sick days pretty much come from the same root source: failure of proper preventative care. Us people don't go to the doctor unless we're sick, typically, because it takes up too much time out of our days to see one otherwise, and it costs too much to go when not necessary, especially with the rising costs of health isurance. By the same token, most people don't fix their computer until it breaks (and sometimes not even then) because it takes time to keep it up-to-date (yes, I know there are auto-updates on virus scanners, Windows patches, etc., but we all know those are imperfect and not necessarily widely implemented), and for those not using free software, it costs money to have an anti-virus subscription or to get a firewall (since most people don't use even MS's built-in firewall).

    The real irony is that, in both cases, the benefits of cost-preventative maintenance far outweigh the costs -- in humans, we get less sick less often, and thereby lead better lives and create less upward pressure on health insurance costs; in computers, there's less downtime, and considerably less risk of some catastrophic breakdown/break-in. Too bad people can't see this, and as a result don't do preventative maintenance.

    1. Re:Same General Reasoning by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      Us people don't go to the doctor unless we're sick

      Yeah, because health care is shit. A girl friend of mine went to the doctor for a check up. The doctor, before doing any sort of regular checks said, "Why are you here. You aren't sick." Girl said, "I havn't had health insurance for a while, i'd like a check up." The doctor, also female, said something to the effect of "You suffer from rich white girl syndrome" at which point my friend's jaw dropped to the floor and then she left.

    2. Re:Same General Reasoning by DrCode · · Score: 1

      I don't consider going to the doctor when not sick "preventive maintenance". That phrase applies to eating healthily, getting exercise, and sleeping enough. These greatly reduce one's chance of needing a doctor.

      For a PC to be healthy, one needs to install healthy software. Running something like Windows every day is equivalent to a person eating a box of doughnuts each morning.

    3. Re:Same General Reasoning by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      I don't consider going to the doctor when not sick "preventive maintenance".

      Why not? He's got specialized diagnostic tools, and lots of experience detecting problems. There's all kinds of things you can find out in a routine physical before they leave you dying in an emergency ward. Blood pressure creeping up? Heart murmur? High blood sugar? High prostate specific antigen level?

      If I'm starting to develop heart disease, diabetes, prostate cancer, etc. I'd rather know about it early and treat before gross symptoms develop--before I have a heart attack, lapse into diabetic coma, or starting seeing lung metastases.

      Even if I live a healthy lifestyle with lots of exercise and a balanced diet, I'd still want to be screened for these things--sometimes, you're just unlucky.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    4. Re:Same General Reasoning by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Yeah! Human illness only occurs when you aren't taking care of yourself. Hypochondriac vegetarians are IMMORTAL!

    5. Re:Same General Reasoning by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      Likewise, both humans and computers can break when you try to do something really stupid.

      "Hey Jim, check this out... I can do a backflip...." CRUNCH!

      "CometCursor? Whoa, that would be sooo coool!"

  30. 99.84 percent by rmull · · Score: 1

    99.84 percent spam? Must be asdf.com.

    --
    See you, space cowboy...
    1. Re:99.84 percent by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Vbug, a Microsoft developer support company based in the UK with just six employees, received around 720,000 e-mails messages in a month, 99.84 percent of which were spam.

      Six employees, 720,000 spams? Someone there must be a real porn hound/idiot giving out email addresses to the wrong folks. I call bullshit on that one, hell, I call bullshit on this whole article.

      I work for a small company, use my email for communicaiton with clients/colleagues (ie; what it's for - not for signing up for a free trial to www.hotwetsluts.com), and I've yet to get spammed on it in 4 years. No filters, either. Only one guy in our company has spam problems, and because he's an asshat who regularly "works late" ie; downloading porn.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:99.84 percent by cultobill · · Score: 1

      Good for you?

      My school account gets more spam than normal mail these days. I haven't signed up for anything wierd on it (I have another address to use at hotwetsluts.com). My source of spam is primarily archives of mailing lists.

      My work account gets 5-10 spam a day. I think I've sent a total of two emails outside the company, and those were to national labs. Source of spam? Asshats posting the group email alias in public places.

      Not everyone who gets spammed deserves it.

      --
      -- Bill "Houdini" Weiss
    3. Re:99.84 percent by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Porn is not the only source of spam. If you have a domain name for an appreciable period of time, it gets out there. So then you get dictionary attacks, all kinds of random things. Sometimes you get customers that are compromised, and they have you in their address books. All kinds of things can happen. We get a ton of connections, probably on the range of this company's, though we don't see much at the end. We have some very good mail filtering rules, a few semi-draconian actions like checking to see if we can connect back to an email server if it's in a DSL/Cable IP block, but I've seen the connection logs. In short, you know nothing about which you speak, sir.

  31. The TechSupport ppl are employees too by vijaya_chandra · · Score: 1

    and so the 7 day average applies to them as well.
    May be the puters' 9 day average downtime is because of this

  32. My downtime experiences by nukem1999 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've only had downtime on one of two my machines for about 2 days. The video card self destructed.

    What's really sad is that, in my rather small local area, more than half the people have had actual downtime due to spyware. (It should be noted that all of our machines are preconfigured with IE5 and Netscape Nav 4.7. Guess which one is more popular.) While I'm not sure exactly why, it seems that some spyware can knock out our source control tools.

    IT seems to be pretty decent about squashing both mail and network based V/W/T however. They send out site-wide emails detailing the status of outbreaks too, which is kind of interesting to watch sometimes. Most of the time, an outbreak notice is sent in the AM, and cleanups are done either before I leave or before I get in the next day. Overall, I'd say ad-based malware is much worse on our time than ad-free malware.

  33. correction by JustDisGuy · · Score: 4, Informative
    ...the average PC was inoperable due to a virus nine days a year

    Apparently even the poster didn't RTFA - the article states:
    The average UK PC is rendered unusable for the equivalent of around nine working days every year because the owner is cleaning up spam or fighting viruses.

    Our corporate workstations were affected significantly enough by virii last year to be down a total of less than a single day each. Still more downtime than we'd like, but nothing like nine days. Now spam - that's another kettle of fish altogether...
    --
    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor
    1. Re:correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it works out to be an average of between 15-20 mintues per day. Maybe some people spend that much time deleting spam.

    2. Re:correction by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      note the word "average", which implies that a heck of a lot of offices out there have far worse figures for PC absenteeism... your's are just at the other end of the curve and you should be patting your IT guys on the back for being so far to the good end of the metric.

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  34. It's worse than they say by Crash+Culligan · · Score: 4, Funny
    If people got as sick as many computers do, when the workers caught viruses, they would dash around the office, coughing hard on everyone they run into. Everyone infected in this manner would start doing the same thing.

    The worst of them are some of those especially illegal eastern European bioengineered viruses -- if a worker catches one of those, he calls the manufacturer and leaves the doors and windows at the workplace unlocked. And then he starts sending out hundreds of emails hawking penis enlargements, breast enlargements, home mortgages, spyware, and immunizations against the most popular, common viruses.

    --
    You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
    1. Re:It's worse than they say by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Yeah, well, at least the infection would go away on it's own after a while. Computers keep caughing forever until they're explicitly stopped.
      It'd be nice to have some real behavior recognition software developed

  35. I like PC down days at the office... by Kenshin · · Score: 5, Funny

    I like those days at the office when PCs are down. It's far more enjoyable fixing those problems than doing actual work...

    --

    Does it make you happy you're so strange?

  36. Computer downtime/Sickness/Safety connection... by bogusbrainbonus · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Hmmm, this is intesting. I know that Toyota and a bunch of other major car companies have figured out that it is cheaper to immunize your employees against the flu/other sicknesses, instead of paying their wages while they're home sneezing.

    The same thing goes for safety, I know at Mercedes they're all about safety and injury prevention, which therefore prevents them from paying workman's comp without getting any value from the worker.

    So this data implies that computer trouble has become as much as a problem as sickness is, I wonder when some company is going to take a major initiative to fix this.

    And you know (, I don't wan't to blame it on windows directly, but sometimes I wonder... How many major auto companies use windows products? Ok, time to stop before I starting getting flamed...

  37. My PC had no sick days this last years... by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Funny

    .. it have its permanent dose of penicillinux.

  38. I'm skeptical by doormat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My computer at work hasnt needed to be "fixed" by our IT staff in over a year (if you dont count patching it every week and new softawre installs). I attribute 90% of computer downtime to people downloading and installing gator/comet cursor and crap like that.

    --
    The Doormat

    If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
  39. PCs on a Bender by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 2, Funny
    The PCs where I work always seem more drunk than sick.

    We send them to the Steve Wozniak Clinic to detox.

    I don't make much sense, do I?

    --
    --- Ban humanity.
  40. PC Doctor makes house calls by FerretFrottage · · Score: 1
    PC Doctor.

    I knew there was a reason for the program. Next thing you know, the HMOs and managed health care plans will start providing PC insurance and for a $20 co-pay you can get your PC checked out. Actually, I guess that what anti-virus and anti-spyware programs do...and compared to realy health insurance, they are quite a bargain.

    --
    "Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
  41. Hmm, what's wrong with my PC.... by rwrife · · Score: 1

    I think my PC may have herpes.....no wait, it's just Windows.

    1. Re:Hmm, what's wrong with my PC.... by Hassman · · Score: 1

      No, it's herpes, but why are you looking in your lap? Your computer isn't down there... that's... well, that's something else. :)

      --
      -Mark
      Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
    2. Re:Hmm, what's wrong with my PC.... by rwrife · · Score: 1

      Oh, I figured I got that from my laptop :)

    3. Re:Hmm, what's wrong with my PC.... by Hassman · · Score: 1

      Those dirty, skanky laptops... always letting other users mess around with them.

      "Come here big boy, I'm small, light and convienent. Why do you log on to me baby?"

      --
      -Mark
      Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
  42. patches by dirvish · · Score: 1

    If patches are equivalent to doctor's visits my PC is one sick critter! I am not sure what a re-install would be equivalent to...

  43. Someone clarify our intent here by blair1q · · Score: 1

    Um, I don't quite get the point of this thread.

    Are we trying to illuminate the deleterious effect of computers and the internet to their own improvement in worker productivity?

    Or are we trying to determine whether /. has been usurped as the biggest internet-related time waster in the typical office environment?

    1. Re:Someone clarify our intent here by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      We're trying to make all the IT guys/cable monkeys feel as though they're important and relevant, if only for 9 days a year.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Someone clarify our intent here by blair1q · · Score: 1

      MODS BUMP THAT POST UPWARDS PLEASE SO WE CAN GET OUT OF THE CAGE FARM AND GO HOME

      hello mudda...hello fodder...here i am in...the lameness filter...life is good here...things are swimming...i just wish the thing was interrupting...

  44. Statistics suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do we know that their 2500 people were representative of all computer users though?

    1. Re:Statistics suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      R-A-N-D-O-M-I-Z-A-T-I-O-N. I don't know if they did it properly, but run some simulations with your idea in mind, and see what happens. Create a huge population with some parameter of interest, then sample 2500 RANDOM individuals and estimate the parameter. I bet it's REALLY CLOSE! This is about 10 lines of code in any statistical computing language. Try for yourself!

  45. A needed survery by utlemming · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Something that would be interesting is to calculate the down time of home PC's and compare that to the down time of corparate PC's. One would hope that Corparate PC would have a longer up time. However, I know for a fact, at least in my case, that I keep my home PC (both my Windows and FreeBSD box, although my FBSD box has had an incredable uptime of about 8 months) running better. Even though I have the ability to make sure that my work PC is running top notch, I just don't have the time at work to make sure that it runs top notch. There seems to be a delicate balance between keeping the computer running just enough to get my work done and having a top notch, well optimized system. I guess since I am not an IT worker I can not justify having a pimped-out, well optimized computer. Nonetheless, comparing uptimes of home and work PC's would be absolutley entertaining.

    --
    The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    1. Re:A needed survery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...although my FBSD box has had an incredable uptime of about 8 months..."

      Sorry, 8 months is not an incredible up-time. I have 2 machines here that have up-times of 18 months, and another machine for production work that hasn't had any OS updates for five years but is stable enough to use for long CGI render jobs (I did swap the hard drive from 4GB to 10GB, but I simply copied the OS & apps straight across. I can't be bothered re-installing an OS and ressurecting my settings just because I've changed a single component; time is money).

      All Macintosh, of course. Although I must admit, I do (did) spend time tweeking the known buggy elements of the OS, but that's a task considerably easier than hacking the Windows registry (open extension/control panel with Resourcerer, add (x)kb to system heap allocation, close file, done. And make sure your WDEFs aren't purgable by running Crash Less Often. All of this is obsolete with OS X).

      "There seems to be a delicate balance between keeping the computer running just enough to get my work done and having a top notch, well optimized system."

      Surely having a top notch, well optimized system is exactly what you need to get your work done? I'll bet that if you did a time & motion study, you would find you lose more time to OS shenanigans than you would preventing them. BTW, there is a world of difference between "optimized" and "pimped-out"; if you concentrated on getting your work machine set up for work, rather than adding a billion bells and whistles, you might find it takes less time than you think (in fact, yours is exactly the mentality that leads IT departments to lock everything down).

  46. But don't forget by Osgyth · · Score: 1

    In my unofficial survey, I've found that 83.46% of all "sick days" taken by computers are caused by user error.

    "What do you mean I wasn't supposed to delete that file?"

    On another note, 99.99992% of computers work harder then the user.

  47. Better than BSD by razmaspaz · · Score: 1

    Taking a few sick days is certainly better than being DEAD.

    --
    I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
  48. These lost productivity reports make me sick by aardwolf204 · · Score: 1
    Whenever I see these reports on ZDnet and the like which cite some unheard of research group found that on average companies loose 30% productivity from their work force due to spam I think of how long it took me to install Spam Assassin (an afternoon) and how long people around the office spend bitching about some popup, or their weather bug, or the v1agr4 spam they got last week (on their hotmail account), or the toolbars they got in IE that wont go away, to them its all spam and they'll spend 1000000% more time bitching about it with the co-workers than it would take to

    A) Delete the spam.
    B) Install a popup blocker. or
    C) Stop installing every "FREE" weather bug utility when you've got a frickin window office.

    Then again, I just spent 5 minutes reading and writing on slashdot about my problem with clueless users. The point is, spam or no spam, people are going to bitch about something or another.
    </rant>
    --
    Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
    1. Re:These lost productivity reports make me sick by will.murnane · · Score: 1

      There are even better solutions. Get Firefox. 0.9 it may be, but it's release quality in my opinion. Better than IE by orders of magnitude. Get a real e-mail account. Gmail will go public eventually, and then Hotmail is doomed. The spam filtering alone would make people switch, and a gig of space for free just helps it along.

  49. LA by Scott+Richter · · Score: 2, Funny
    Living in Seattle, they might think differently.

    Psssh. Come out here, I'll introduce you to the 405. If the gangbangers don't kill you, the soccer moms surely will.

    1. Re:LA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I'll introduce you to the 405

      Been there done that. However, Seattle has a 405 too, and in my experience, just as bad or worse.

    2. Re:LA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever. Come to the Bay Area and I'll introduce you to 80, 280, 680, and 880. 580 isn't so bad.

    3. Re:LA by Scott+Richter · · Score: 1
      Whatever. Come to the Bay Area and I'll introduce you to 80, 280, 680, and 880. 580 isn't so bad.

      Yeah, but the point is you guys have BART, and we have a big pile of shit. And I've driven your freeways, I'll take them any day over LA. The 580 is better than "not bad," it's a dream compared to anything we have.

    4. Re:LA by sumbry · · Score: 1

      I knew it.

      Driving a route that takes me through that interchange takes 45 minutes at midnight, 1.5 hours around noon, and 2 hours during rush hour.

      I laugh at Seattle and NYC traffic patterns, you guys have nothing on LA. The sad thing is we don't have a couple or bridges or interchanges that are bad, every freeway everywhere is bad. No matter which way you go, you're screwed.

  50. Obligatory Simpsons Quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We call that the Dennis Miller ratio."

    1. Re:Obligatory Simpsons Quote by jpmkm · · Score: 1

      Except that the dennis miller ratio is 1 in a million, or .0001%

  51. Just because the [PC|employee] is up... by potus98 · · Score: 1

    Just because the PC (or employee) is healthy, does NOT imply it's being productive. I mean jeez, look at the slackdotters around here.

    --
    This one gang kept wanting me to join cause I'm pretty good with a bo staff.
  52. the big news by prockcore · · Score: 1

    I'm suprised no one has caught onto the big news:
    the average employee was out sick seven days a year

    Considering that we only get 5 days of sick time, this is a travesty.

  53. Viruses are not the only thing causing downtime by Shivantrill · · Score: 3, Interesting
    My personal Tally:

    What about things like BSOD when you try to do more than your "little" OS can handle? This happens to me once a week on average. Reboot takes ~10 minutes.

    Then there's the "really, really critical security patch" (no shit, that's what our IT calls them now). These require reboots many times. And since I am always working on several things at once, see above, the shutdown and reboot may take 15 min or more. I would estimate we get at least 6 of these a year.

    Once a week we have a virus scan program that runs, slowing my machine to a crawl... see above, and cuts my productivity by 30% for at least 3 hours.

    Then at least once a year, something happens where my computer may be spontaneously booted form the network, account locked or some such stuff. This requires a help[less] desk call which takes me down for at least half a day to resolve the problem.

    So the total is:

    • BSOD = 8.2 hours/year

    • Patches = 1.5 hours/year
      Virus Scan = 50 hours/year
      Help-Desk - 4 hours/year
      Total: 63.5 hours/year @ avg workday = 7 hours;
    9 days of downtime.
    I was sick a total of 2 days last year.
    --
    Karma, We don't need no stinkin' karma!
    1. Re:Viruses are not the only thing causing downtime by Hassman · · Score: 1

      WHy is the virus scan being run during the day? That should be a scheduled maintenance task that opperates at night.

      --
      -Mark
      Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
    2. Re:Viruses are not the only thing causing downtime by narcc · · Score: 1

      So what happens when you factor your time doing things like reading slashdot, getting coffee, snacking, etc. ?

    3. Re:Viruses are not the only thing causing downtime by Shivantrill · · Score: 1
      Welll... because most of us are on laptops which are shut down and taken home or locked up. Plus we have some users that shut down their PCs every night. Someone in IT once told them it was "good" for the computer to have a rest and then refresh itself (read as reboot)

      Due to security concerns, we are not supposed to leave our laptops in the office unless they are locked up somehow.

      We used to be able to schedule the scan for when it was convenient. Because of all the viruses going around, and too many users blindly clicking away... It is forced on everyone at the same time, Wednesday beginning at noon, your local time. In theory, it should only run for 1 hour while you are at lunch. In reality, it takes 3 hours on my machine. Any attempts to alter the schedule, result in it being reset the next time you log into the network.

      At our company... Big Brother is not only watching, he's making sure you don't hurt yourself.
      The cubicle version of taking away your belt because "Kid, we don't want any hangings." Alice's Restaurant [with apologies to Arlo]

      --
      Karma, We don't need no stinkin' karma!
    4. Re:Viruses are not the only thing causing downtime by glorf · · Score: 1

      Ah, but what about all your fractional sick time? If you are going to make a comparison you have to use the same methodology.

      15 extra minutes on the throne from the bad guacamole at lunch. (lets say 6/year)

      15 minute trip (x4) to the medicine cabinet to get aspirin the last Friday before quarter end when everyone is rushing to get the numbers right.

      2 seconds per sneeze (x100/year)

      5 minute trip (x8) to the bathroom to rewet your contacts after some dust got in them.

      etc.

      You may have only called in sick 2 days, but your physical condition has been responsible many times for less than 100% productivity during those 7 hour days. And if you took any vacation why shouldn't that count against the human total downtime?

      Or in the other direction, when the server dies, that isn't sick time for your PC, it berievement leave.

      Basically you should consider what your productivity is with the PC and what it would be without it. If you get more than 9 more days of work done with the PC than without then its a net gain.

    5. Re:Viruses are not the only thing causing downtime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about things like BSOD when you try to do more than your "little" OS can handle? This happens to me once a week on average. Reboot takes ~10 minutes.

      If you're getting BSODs more then once a quarter, then you're using poor hardware or the wrong revisions of the drivers. Saving $5 on a $50 purchase is stupid if it results in downtime because the manuf doesn't know how to program.

      A good rule of thumb is to never buy hardware that isn't on Microsoft's HCL (yeah, so MS is evil, but the HCL is a good resource).

  54. Why call in sick? by eltoyoboyo · · Score: 1

    It's hard to /. at home. That's what my computer spends a goodly amount of time doing at work. That and providing - repetitive exercises (Solitaire up, Solitaire down, and 3 and 4). It enjoys its job too much to call in sick.

    --
    Have you Meta Moderated t
  55. But Wintel is cheaper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. to buy than Macs or linux machines. Standardization makes it cheaper, they said. It is easier to support, they claimed. "They" need to be fired.

    It never ceases to amaze me that something like this completely escapes the attention of CIOs and IT people. How productive is your highly paid employees now?

  56. Spam, the other name for Email by Ghost-in-the-shell · · Score: 1


    One question I have is who defined what the spam was? Is my girlfriends email about supper tonight spam if delivered to my work account?

    It's a simple question, likely to get many flames but it has an interesting impact!

    --
    -Ghost
  57. Vacation by jakel2k · · Score: 1

    Even if the computer was down 9 days out of the year, there is still vacation days that they don't use. Plus the fact that the computer at times does over time, (where a process is ran overnight or over the weekend.) I for one welcome our new mechanical overlords... (RTFA I don't need no stinking RTFA.)

  58. this is stupid by presmike · · Score: 2, Interesting

    if the pc's are down that long, the IT staff starting with the CTO needs to be fired. In my 3 years as a network admin I haven't had all the pc's put together down for 9 days. Especially not for something as simple as viruses.

    --
    presmike
  59. 3 hours here... 1 hour there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is 216 hours. Still high yes, but much more realistic.

  60. Got to be a first... by DnsZero · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Finally, a slashdot article with a strong reason to support installing MS Windows on your work machine!

  61. Headline Fixed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [Windows] PCs Use More Sick Days Than People.

    All of our Linux and MacOS X systems at work have been fine.

  62. 88% = 1.3 million emails a day of SPAM by Specter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Coincidently, this morning I happened to overhear our email folks (in my day job) talking about our SPAM rate. We're up to 88% now. That represents 1.3 million of the average 1.5 million messages we receive per day.

    *sigh*

  63. Easy explination by mackman · · Score: 1

    At least where I work my colleagues and I frequently install viruses on our own computers, make a hysterical call to IT about how I have looming deadlines, and go home early.

  64. Re:so grasshopper by Random_Goblin · · Score: 1

    oh i get it venerable master...

    the software engineer was worried that she might be sacked after she completed her project, however when she realised her work was flawed she was happy because she should already have been sacked for being rubbish, and all her subsequent employment was a lucky bonus?

    As the great master said "it is all swings and roundabouts"

    am i enlightened yet?...i don't have to pick up redhot mainframes with my bare forearms now do i?

  65. Two words... by missing_boy · · Score: 1

    Linux and SPAMAssassin.

  66. I know somebody who bought an AV CD by crovira · · Score: 1

    And that's ALL she did. It never occured to her to INSTALL it. We're not takling about keeping up with the updates.

    Some user's are clueless and have to be protected from buying a new PC everytime it 'slows down.'

    The only time it wasn't sending Spam is when it was turned off (which sometimes she couldn't even do without pulling the plug from the powerbar; trying to shut it down wasn't working.)

    Maybe she should have stuck to the abacus...

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  67. You left one out... by paranode · · Score: 4, Funny

    BSD is the guy everyone ignored. He died yesterday.


    (hey it's ./, I like BSD too!)

  68. Job security? by pointbeing · · Score: 1
    ...the average PC was inoperable due to a virus nine days a year.

    I find this amazing.

    I guess business needs to learn you spend it now or you spend it later - with adequate protection on the mail gateway, file, print and mail servers and desktop PCs I don't think we have nine days *total* virus downtime a year across the 2500 machines in our organization - at 86 locations in 14 countries.

    I can understand that firewalls and AV products are expensive - but downtime is even more expensive.

    If the proper infrastructure is in place a network can be reasonably secure - but businesses need to spend some money to secure it. If they've spent the cash and are still seeing this kind of downtime they need to fire a buncha sysadmins and desktop support people.

    --
    we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
    -- anais nin
  69. Well... by ThousandStars · · Score: 1
    The DP Quicksilver 800 I sometimes use with a friend has given him 0 downtime since he bought the box.

    As for my Dell Windows machine (which I bought at about the same time), I've had about ~10 hours worth of downtime, which doesn't include the OS wipe I'm going to have to do shortly due to Windows quirks.

    So neither computer has been down a whole lot. But then again, both of us know a reasonable amount about how not to fsck up computers.

  70. This is because of stupid users by Retired+Replicant · · Score: 1

    If you don't want spam coming into your work e-mail address, you should only give it out to your work colleagues and clients. If anybody is getting 99% spam in their work e-mail inbox, it is because they used their work e-mail address to register for websites, buy stuff online, etc. And they didn't bother to uncheck any of the boxes to sign up for "newsletters" and "exciting offers from our partners." I guard the e-mail addresses I use for personal business and work carefully. I use disposable, free Yahoo mail addresses to register on websites and make online purchases. Using this technique, I have only received one or two pieces of spam at my "real" e-mail addresses in the past several years. My Yahoo addresses get all the spam, and even those are pretty good at filtering the spam into the "Bulk" folder.

  71. Who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Computers are a lot cheaper than an employees, why compare sick days for people to computers?

  72. Just some random math... by RosebudLTD · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'd say that the average machine I maintain for corporate cluebies takes about an hour a week to run through scandisk, and another hour to defrag. Add on an hour to run through an Ad-Aware sweep (how the hell do they get some of this stuff on their machines... it's about time to just say 'screw it', and disable any and all forms of ActiveX, program downloading, or scripting) and you're up to three. Add an hour for the weekly full system virus scan. Add fifteen minutes to add any new Windows Updates, and another five for associated reboots (a minute here and there add up).

    That gives me a total of 4:20 a week in regular maintainance. (insert pot reference, here) Over the course of the year, that comes out to just over 9 days.

    Keep in mind, though, that normally this maintainance would be done during off hours. The business I have in mind, though, is open 24-7. Any maintainance has to be done while the machines are potentially in use.

    My point, though, is that I can have 9 days of downtime on a machine, even without the user screwing it up.

  73. So, are these average? Well, they're my data! by Roadkills-R-Us · · Score: 3, Informative

    Absence per year:
    At work:
    ~250 Linux systems: 1-2 hrs/yr
    ~20 Solaris systems: 1-2 hrs/yr
    ~25 Windows systems: 2 day/yr?
    ~10 Macs: 2-3 hrs/yr
    Then again, we have serious firewalls, and bought a Barracuda spam/virus filter. The Linux downtime is almost all hardware-related (old, dying PS, cheap memory - yes, we're getting away from these). Mac downtime is mostly hardware, and one flaky OS9 app.

    At home:
    2 Linux systems: 1 day/yr
    2 Win systems: 1 day/yr
    Good firewalls, only the Linux systems have internet access. Linux systems are always on, Windows are on mostly when used, so guesstimate is for lost time. Down time for Linux systems is mostly trying something weird or adding hardware. About half the Windows downtime is for that.

    I also have a production Linux server at a colo. It's been up 499 days, and was down for maybe 2 hours the previous year. So 1 hr/yr.
    I have a good firewall for this system, too.

    Lessons? Even Windows systems can show up *if* you have a secure environment and educated, trustworthy users. We have, just today, though, implemented a "no IE" policy. And without Windows, life is even easier.

    (For the record, TCO/system at our site, and my house, is *much* lower for the non-Windows systems. 8^)

  74. *nix boxes and OS X Macs included? by grolaw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have serious doubts that the survey included machines with stable operating systems.

    I would hazard a guess that the wintel world wants it that way...

    Somebody gets paid to remove the malware.

  75. Only 9 sick days vs. 7/8 time not working by Ra5pu7in · · Score: 1

    Considering how much time one group of co-workers spends talking about everything but work, during hours they are being paid to work, I'd be happy to have them take only 9 sick days. My PC would have to be a zombie to waste that much time.

    --
    I was taking one day at a time, but then several days got together and ambushed me. (from a Rhymes with Orange comic)
  76. Re:so grasshopper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am sorry. You must spend another lifetime on the Great Wheel. See you in 50 years.

  77. weird result by timts · · Score: 1

    my 3 desktops, 1 laptop at home, 1 pocketpc, 2 desktop at work can run 365 days a year, even when there's a virus.
    btw, I pity the short life span of a pc, they got killed when they can still walk.

  78. cough! cough! by quantaspeed · · Score: 1

    [in stephen hawking's voice] my mouse hurts...

  79. Woe is you. by freeze128 · · Score: 1

    So far for the past 2 years I have had:

    1 PC

    The same image on it.

    I reboot MAYBE once a month.

    I have been infected with zero viruses, have had 0 browser hijacks, and have installed 0 pieces of spyware (cookies don't count).

    I work in IT.

    I am running Windows XP Professional, and I am always logged in as ADMINISTRATOR!

    How have I avoided problems for all these years? Easy. I follow my own guidelines: Don't execute email attacments, don't install software from untrusted websites, use an antivirus and keep it up-to-date, use windows update. This provides evidence that it is NOT the operating system that is causing problems, but the users who just can't help themselves but to go to online gambling and shopping websites.

    1. Re:Woe is you. by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      Across our company I've had staff PCs "unavailable" due to viruses for maybe a total of 90 minutes over two years. The most major downtime other than viruses has been a Twinhead laptop that had has both RAM and hard drive replaced and needs another hard drive again. Fair's fair though, my Fujitsu laptop had bad RAM and a bad hard drive, but the level of service is such that it hasn't been unavailable for more than a day in two years. Other than that, we've lost two PCs -- one to a major leak (we call it "The Flood") and one to a power supply failure.

      Student labs are a different matter...

  80. 99.84%, eh? by moyix · · Score: 2, Funny
    "The article also discusses junk e-mail's impact on productivity, with one business reporting that 99.84 percent of all incoming mail is spam."

    I've got a revolutionary system to fight spam that I guarantee will be 99.84% effective for this company! It's simple, free, and uses all existing tools! Here's some sample code:

    root@mailhost# init 0

    PS: Don't listen to people who tell you it has a high rate of false positives. 99.84% effective, man!

  81. Let me guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was a Filipino doctor, right? I swear to God I've heard the exact same thing from my mother-in-law.

    1. Re:Let me guess by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      It was a Filipino doctor, right? I swear to God I've heard the exact same thing from my mother-in-law.

      not sure.

  82. MOD IT DOWN - YHBT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make that "Troll," please. It's a karma-trollwhore

  83. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  84. Results skued due to MS by plutoiddiamonds · · Score: 1

    I would like to see the breakout between Windows and Linux.

  85. Plurar of virus by dwave · · Score: 1

    The ZD editor got it right and used the term 'viruses' and not 'virii'. So learning Latin was good for something.

  86. Wrong example by dwave · · Score: 1

    The example in the article is not very well chosen. It describes some guy involved with IT as an CEO explaining how many mails had to be deleted from the inboxes by hand. One can only speculate about their state of mail servers. If the mail server runs spamassassin they shouldn't have gotten that huge amounts of UBE/UCE. Client-side spam-filtering is never good. But if the company can't afford an admin, then there're mail clients with spam-filters, e.g. thunderbird, mozilla -mail. False positives are always problem. Due to faulty mail-clients, silly subjects or just improper email header fields. If the senders can't write a proper email they'll have to call me on the telephone. It's a harsh policybut it works.

  87. All that company's support people should be fired by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. if a computer is down for more than a few hours, there should be heads rolling. Priority #1 is ALWAYS when someone isnt able to work- you have to get them back up and running in some form, even if it means handing them a laptop.

    2. It's so easy to filter spam from the inbound email server, the problem isnt spam so much as either not fixing the problem or management not paying for the proper applications. The filters arent perfect, but catching 98% of spam is better than having 99% of email BE spam.

  88. Just how hard is it? by CdBee · · Score: 1

    ..to set up an office PC properly:

    I mean.. the standard image they come with from the manufacturer is always a bit buggy due to things like multimedia keyboards, java plugin updaters, windows messenger, etc autorunning... and FAT32 disk drives if its a Dell.

    Repartition, 8gb for system, rest as a single NTFS partition. Move swapfile into 2nd partition. Disable Messenger service, uninstall Windows Messenger if XP. Update Windows.

    Defragment, install apps, defragment again. Lock down user accounts so they can change clock, date, screen res and background but nothing else. Disable Luna theme if XP. Set AV to autoupdate, turn on ICF if XP.. and send to its end user.

    Or just set up the domain login and send out a machine with a crappy manufacturers image.. and enjoy supporting it.

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
  89. My workers dont use much email anymore by fluor2 · · Score: 1

    My workers dont use much email anymore.

    They use

    - MSN Messenger
    - Jabber

    Chat tools.

    E-mail is unreliable, chat-tools are not.

  90. I know you're just kidding by Alexis+de+Torquemada · · Score: 1

    but with (false positives) / (false positives plus true negatives) = 100%, your spam filter would definitely suck. This happens to be the probability that a legitimate mail gets marked as spam.

  91. At odds to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work in the UK, supporting the software distribution to over one hundred and fifety thousand workstations, and eight thousand servers for the government.

    As a stat-monkey, I can quite honestly say the workstations on the estate suffer far less problems than the users that operate them. Almost without a doubt, the only time a PC is inoperable is when, somehow, it has corrupted itself enough to warrant the hard disk swapping out. Far less than one day's work and it happens very, very rarely.

  92. meta: ot: ot: re: traffic by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

    i didn't reply to the grandparent.

    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  93. It is because we are smart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That we made sure that intelligence became a desirable trait in our society.

    That way us smart people get the cushy jobs and don't have to pay for our music, movies or whatever.

    If you have a problem with that, go watch sports on TV.

    If I can convince any regular person that I am smart by mumbling off technical terms until they let me do what I want, is that any worse than physicall intimidating people by having abnormally large muscles?

  94. PLEASE GET OFF THE INTERNET by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please get off the internet.

  95. Re:So, are these average? Well, they're my data! by CobwoyNeal · · Score: 1

    All email virii are spread by user stupidity, opening shady attachments.

  96. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  97. Re:Mary-Kate Olsen, actress, dead at 18 by thing2b · · Score: 1

    Was she a horny vixen you ask? Yes

    --
    Webmaster of Infoweb