Slashdot Mirror


Workers Will Smash Their PCs To Get an Upgrade

An anonymous reader writes "One in four office workers reckon that the best way to get a new work computer is to smash up the one they have — either that or to take it down to the junk shop themselves. Some 40 per cent of office workers complain that their aging workplace PC hurts their productivity and many are tempted to resort to extreme measures to get an upgrade, including taking a hammer to the aging beast on the desktop. Some ten per cent of UK workers said they'd even resort to buying new parts for their work devices themselves to perform their own upgrade; particularly those who work in smaller organizations."

62 of 533 comments (clear)

  1. Never underestimate the power of liquids by grapeape · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I worked in a office where about once a year one of the employees would "spill" coffee on her laptop..usually a week or so after she noticed a deployment of new laptops in some other department. It worked until she moved to a floor with security camera's and was caught...after that her replacement was the one that recieved a shiny new one. The sad part was the machines she had were never out of date they simply became bogged down because of her browsing and installing habits, but rather than ask to have it cleaned up or god forbit learn to do it herself she would just have an "accident".

    1. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2

      installing habits

      You give your users admin rights? No wonder things are screwed up. We used to do that with our investigator laptops (I work for a government agency which deals with enforcement).

      When we did our equipment replacement, we removed their admin rights. Amazingly we have had zero problems since that time. Correlation = causation in this case.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    2. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by FooGoddess · · Score: 2

      I worked in a office where about once a year one of the employees would "spill" coffee on her laptop..usually a week or so after she noticed a deployment of new laptops in some other department. [...]

      This ruse doesn't work on ThinkPads. Co-worker spilled an entire litre of water directly onto the keyboard of a company owned running laptop. Hell to pay if laptop ruined. Unplug, pull out battery, pull disk drive, dry face-down on cookie rack for 24 hours. Reassemble, reboot. Laptop worked for another 18 months. IT department never knew.

    3. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by Moryath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Try working in most actual business environments.

      The argument always goes back and forth like this:

      IT Side - we have the following reasons that normal users shouldn't be installing programs themselves.
      - Security risk of adware/malware/bundleware
      - Number of incidents where machines have been compromised.
      - Number of incidents where complaints of "my machine is slow" turn out to be the result of user filling drive up with crap

      User side -
      - "But it takes more than 5 minutes for them to come down and install (program X that's actually work related) for me." Nevermind that these installs happen maybe once per year and if they would bother SCHEDULING with us...
      - "But I want to try out (program y) to see if we can use it in the business..."
      - User happens to be the PHB's son or is fucking the PHB on the side.

      Brain-dead PHB side-
      - "My employees are complaining that you IT guys are getting in the way of their work! Fix it so they can install things!"
      - One month later: "Megan's machine got infected again. Why the hell aren't you IT guys stopping this from happening? Do whatever it takes to stop this from happening again!"
      - One more month later: "Megan's complaining you took away her install rights! I need her to be working as best as possible, give them back to her! She can't possibly cause problems with that!"

      Now add in that you might be working in an EDUCATION environment - where every tenured faculty member is also a brain-dead PHB.

    4. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by MoonBuggy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't doubt that what you say is accurate, but I'm amazed it's still socially acceptable for people to be unable to use the basic technology we interact with every day. A person who needs to drive a company vehicle as part of their job would be out pretty quickly if they kept crashing into trees - sure, the occasional genuine accident happens, and will be overlooked, but negligence/stupidity/repeated incompetence will (rightly) get you fired. There's absolutely no reason that the same shouldn't apply to people using company computers.

    5. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by g00head · · Score: 2

      Network Admin at a $1B company - all users locked down to User rights only, including the 3 private owners and their various family members employed by the company.

      It's not whether your company is an 'actual business environment' or a smaller strip-mall style office, it's whether the owners/CxO's/BoD can be made to understand the detrimental effects of giving users unrestricted access to their systems, as well has having an IT Manager/CTO that can explain the dangers to them in non-IT terms.

      It helps as well to have a base image for job types: Most workers get the base XP SP3 with Office 2k7, then we install SAP if they need it for their specific job. For the Engineers/QA, we have another image that also includes Visio among others, then install any specific apps they may need like Solidworks or CAD. We also have a large contingent of Mac users, and that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish, but we're working on very stringent standards on those non-enterprise nightmares (at least in a primarily Windows business environment).

      --
      "I'd make a wooshing sound, but the post was so far over your head it was inaudible..."
    6. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 2

      Let this myth die please. You can run XP easily as a Limited User, I've been doing it for years. Any comptent IT person should be able to set up a Limited User Account so that the user can do his/her tasks. I actually find the implementation of XP better than in Vista/7 because you get "access denied" and that's it. Under Vista/7 you get a username/password prompt which hints to the user he could do something (which she/he can't, but the dialog suggests it). With "access denied", they'll call you and you can either tell them they're doing stuff they shouldn't or go over and fix the problem. In all these years, of setting up XP/Limited, the latter rarely happened because I try to foresee all use-cases for the user.

    7. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      that's the real trick, if Windows had and enforced proper user/system separation then companies could lock down the systems that would limit that crap. Windows and it's applications assume you have full admin rights all the time. UAC while bad was a good step MSFT should have just pressed harder program developers to code properly, and forced all XP programs into a hard lock down mode.

      Are you from 1999? Software developers stopped assuming users have admin access a few years after XP hit the scene. It's only rare medical of scientific control software that's written that stupidly anymore. And guess what? There is specialty scientific software for Linux out there that assumes you're root.
      And windows is easy to segregate admin access on desktops either manually or via GPO. You can even list admin users additively or destructively(replacing the current list, preventing admins from adding someone else as an admin).

    8. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by drsmithy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      that's the real trick, if Windows had and enforced proper user/system separation [...]

      It has had for nearly twenty years. Fifteen if you only want to start counting from NT4. The problem isn't the lack of OS capability.

      breaking easy backward compatiblity in the name of security isn't a bad thing.

      Apparently it is. Just look at the negative commentary in Slashdot about UAC, from people who should know better.

    9. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Here is another side. Short of any vertical applications that are specialized a large company could switch to an all linux environment and gain additional advantages. OO.o is 100% useable in a company environment. Oracle runs under linux well so most of the accounting department will not notice a difference. The whiners that hate change will whine for about 2 weeks.

      Problem is most large companies get a sweet deal from Microsoft to ensure they dont do this. Microsoft sales guys for fortune 500 companies work really hard to program and FUD to death the CTO and other executives to keep that nasty evil hacker OS out of their company. There are companies that resist, but most roll over. They like the fact that they can have a idiot (I.E. master of business administration) maintain a department sharepoint webpage with microsoft word and Outlook instead of a nice webserver with a wordpress blog on it that is just as simple to maintain. They get the executives to drink deeply of the new sharepont coolaid and now they repeat it like a mantra. Yay yet another POS in the company that is based on closed and crappy standards so migration away is impossible.

      Luckily there are SOME companies that get it. I work for one after suffering with the typical "we love MS for no real reason" type for the past 14 years. Now I love how one IT staff can manage 50 to 100 pc's and laptops on his own. We deploy a IT guy per floor and per department that way they are experts in that departments needs. new app is easy to deploy across the board, new OS updates as well, and we can migrate a user to a new pc or laptop in minutes and everything is where they left it, the apps all are right with the settings. Even the wallpaper is correct. we have replaced 20 desktops over lunch before. they went to lunch and returned to new computers. Most did not notice until later that day or the next day when they looked under the desk and saw a silver tower instead of the black one. Cant do that with windows.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    10. Re:Never underestimate the power of liquids by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2

      Are you from 1999? Software developers stopped assuming users have admin access a few years after XP hit the scene.

      Bullshit - unless you mean "sometime after right now" when you say "a few years after XP". There are still a lot of new programs which do not work properly w/o Admin rights.

      Hell, even MS Dynamics 2008 required Administrator rights to run (can't recall if it was local or domain , at the moment, but I do recall that allowing everyone access to run the program didn't do the trick).

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  2. You mean monitors? by Toe,+The · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's funny how many people point to their monitor and call it their computer. I can imagine a lot of people smash up their monitor expecting that it will result in their getting a new computer.

    What I'd really like to know is how many people do that; get a replacement monitor; and say, "Wow, this new computer is so much faster!"

  3. Re:smash by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

    Is no one going to mention destruction of company property = firing?

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  4. Obligatory by cashman73 · · Score: 3, Funny
  5. It's Not The Hardware... by benjamindees · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reason most office workers are unproductive has nothing to do with their hardware.

    --
    "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    1. Re:It's Not The Hardware... by Yetihehe · · Score: 2

      Because good carpenter already has good tools.

      --
      Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
    2. Re:It's Not The Hardware... by aralin · · Score: 2

      Yes? I am a developer at Oracle. I worked for 5 years on my original computer. After that I went through a lot of hassle, it took me about 6 hours of my time in total over few days to get a new computer. I've got 3 years old refurbished one. They kept in place my old CRT monitor, because it was "working". Now another 5 years passed, I've still got that now 8 years old computer and that 10 years old CRT monitor. There was no way I would go through the Oracle Procurement again. I bought myself an iMac some 4 years ago and worked from home just so I could keep being productive and actually enjoy working on the computer in front of me instead of getting sick to my stomach every day from looking at 8 year old piece of junk from Dell. YMMV

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
  6. SSDs to the rescue? by chemicaldave · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Obviously the 5 year old computers in TFA could use an upgrade, but I've found that for my aging workstations, a simple storage upgrade to an SSD would probably be more than enough to increase my productivity. Storage is the new bottleneck, not processing power.

  7. Something to be learned from the spiller by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    There might be something to be learned from the spiller. Rather than wasting anyone's time to "clean up" a "bogged down" desktop, it sounds like at least one of your users would have been perfectly happy with an annual drive wipe. There might be more like her.

    1. Re:Something to be learned from the spiller by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Funny

      The only way is to issue destructive/"accident prone" people used or reconditioned machines. I always say, "take care of this solid, but old machine for 18 months and we'll see about letting you have a new one.". It works pretty well. That coffee spiller would have been quite deflated if she'd had to deal with me, heh -- "I'm so sorry you had an accident with your Pentium M laptop; here's a nice, reconditioned PIII for a replacement -- awwww and you were only 6 months from getting one of the new ones... Well, maybe(the last quarter of 2012!".

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    2. Re:Something to be learned from the spiller by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      "Unfortunately, where I work they have a policy specifically never to replace PC's unless they have no choice."

      Hey boss, yeah, my PC is on fire.... what should I do? I tried pressing Ctl-Alt-Del but I cant find a "fire.exe" process to kill and it's really starting to stink and fill the room with smoke.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Something to be learned from the spiller by kcbnac · · Score: 2

      Windows 7 (Pro and above) is licensed for a VM install of XP Pro. Microsoft even offers a pre-configured one for this purpose. Then you can have the app run like a normal one on 7, but its actually running in XP.

  8. What a bunch of dummies by countertrolling · · Score: 5, Funny

    Slow computers means taking lots of breaks and going out for a snack. I don't want to be more 'productive'. I want to relax, and a slow machine helps me do just that.

    "What the hell is taking you so long?"

    I just shrug and point to the screen...

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    1. Re:What a bunch of dummies by bunratty · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Most unproductive workers are unproductive because they're lazy and dumb. They blame the computer because it's easier than admitting they're lazy and dumb. If programmers could write complex programs in the 50s and 60s using punched cards and waiting overnight for the output of their runs, a smart and diligent worker could figure out how to queue up work so they could be productive even with a "slow" computer. Their "slow" computer is thousands of times faster and is available to them nearly all day! Only a poor worker blames his tools. Now if the computer just plain didn't work, that would be a different story...

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    2. Re:What a bunch of dummies by Jaysyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Their "slow" computer is thousands of times faster and is available to them nearly all day! Only a poor worker blames his tools. Now if the computer just plain didn't work, that would be a different story...

      Says the person who has never used a serious CAD or GIS application on non-cutting edge workstation.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    3. Re:What a bunch of dummies by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      If programmers could write complex programs in the 50s and 60s using punched cards and waiting overnight for the output of their runs, a smart and diligent worker could figure out how to queue up work so they could be productive even with a "slow" computer.

      I recently came across the user manual from a computer of that era, the STANTEC ZEBRA[1]. It had two instruction sets, the full set and one called 'simple code' (which was actually pretty complex). One of the limitations of simple code was that programs could be at most 150 instructions. This, the manual notes, is not an important limitation, because no one could feasibly write a working program that complex.

      I also came across some exercise books from people who programmed these machines, showing their code. First, they drew flow charts, then they wrote the assembly-like code, then they punched the cards (in machine code - the assembler was the human). Then they took a bus to the computer and joined the queue to test them. If they didn't work, they'd have 5 minutes to patch (literally, applying patches to cover up holes in the cards) and resubmit the job before being bumped to the next day. The most complex programs in this exercise book were things that I could implement on a modern computer in well under five minutes, and they took a typical programmer back then about a week to do.

      So, yes, programmers back then could write programs. They could write programs that were complex, in comparison to the hardware that they ran on. They could write programs that could get work done a hundred or so times faster than a human doing the same work. But their productivity was orders of magnitude lower than a modern programmer. Some of the 'complex' programs from that era would be a single line of code in a modern high-level language.

      [1] I had a post-doc position for 8 months attached to a History of Computing project a couple of years back.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:What a bunch of dummies by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      No, the programmers of the 50's and 60's were horribly unproductive by today's standards. Their biggest bottleneck was ridiculously crappy equipment by today's standards. "Only a poor worker blames his tools." is one of those sound bites that sound's good, but on even the slightest examination shows how dumb it is. The counter sound bite is "Use the right tool for the job."

    5. Re:What a bunch of dummies by Jaysyn · · Score: 2

      Ever tried running full-featured CAD software on a 500 MHz with 256 MB RAM? I did that for a good while, and it wasn't more than a few years ago.

      Even our 'new' computers are barely adequate Celerons with 1 GB RAM. Yeah, I can get by, but it's an exercise in pain/anger management any time I have to do anything more than a basic drawing.

      Damn. I'm running a Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 @ 2.33GHz with 4 GB of RAM & it still chokes on the CAD & GIS stuff I'm working on right now. I quite literally couldn't even use you machine.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    6. Re:What a bunch of dummies by pathological+liar · · Score: 2

      Unless you're at a tiny company (single digits) where the "IT guy" is the "CTO", he almost certainly doesn't set the budget, he just makes do with what he has.

      As someone who got saddled with desktop support in addition to real work, please: if your hardware is inadequate and preventing you from doing your job, bitch to your boss, NOT your IT guy. I sympathize, but I can't do anything about it and it's getting more than a little tired.

  9. bean counters hate computer upgrades? by v1 · · Score: 2

    really? who'd have thought? TYCO

    I work at a computer retail store (and yes we have a biased opinion on the matter) but we try to show business owners that 10 year old computers really are a problem, even when they still work. It's amazing how hard it is to get some people to replace an old computer with a new one, when the old one still (sort of) works. It's so hard to explain productivity loss due to antiquated tools to the people holding the checkbook.

    Numerous times we've had people bring in ancient computers that have died and must now be replaced, and have to treat them to the bad news that their combination of very old hardware and very old software is going to be an extremely unpleasant and expensive experience now, as they have to buy all new computer, all new peripherals (seen a peripheral cost 10k once), all new software (can you say "pagemager", "creative suite" and "quark" for 10 computers?) and all your documents are going to have to go through a painful migration of format. Generally leaves the office in chaos for the next month too. I really feel sorry for those staff.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:bean counters hate computer upgrades? by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      we try to show business owners that 10 year old computers really are a problem, even when they still work.

      If they still perform the task for which they were intended 10 years ago, why are they a problem?

      The real problem isn't old computers, it's new software. New software comes out which doesn't really do anything better than your old software. But people you do business with upgraded, so now you have to upgrade your software to interoperate with them. But the new software runs more slowly, and now you need new hardware to do the same task you were doing just fine 6 months ago.

      For a stand-alone application, there's nothing wrong with 10 year old computers. Or 20 year old computers, for that matter. DOS still works as well as it ever did.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:bean counters hate computer upgrades? by WhirlwindMonk · · Score: 2

      How on earth did you get modded insightful? I thought slashdot was a place for nerds, you know, people who work in CAD or programming, where hardware (and to a lesser extent, software) upgrades every few years can make a HUGE difference. Also, you say DOS still works as well as it ever did (completely ignoring the fact that "as well as it ever did" is leagues behind what we have now), but as you bring in new people, can you imagine trying to teach someone who has only every worked in Windows XP to use DOS? Or going from AutoCAD 2011 to AutoCAD R12? Why would you want to spend days or weeks training every new employee to use your out of date crap setup, when you can just do a basic upgrade and safely assume that anyone qualified for the position will know how to use it?

  10. Easy cure by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Any smashed PC is replaced by the oldest in stock. new replacements for those which reach the budgeted life intact.

    1. Re:Easy cure by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 2

      Any smashed PC is replaced by the oldest in stock. new replacements for those which reach the budgeted life intact.

      More of a symptomatic treatment than a cure, though. Those old machines are gonna "wear out" faster than a new one. Either that, or your people start building Wally-style computer catapults. There's always an engineering solution.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
  11. Work smarter not harder by tsalmark · · Score: 2

    New computers are great but work habits can increase the productivity of a tool also. I keep seeing people complain about the speed of email then go over and see 100 email windows open. Or someone will have movies running in the background and complain that Excel is slow. So do you throw more hardware at the problem, close unneeded programs or learn better work habits?

  12. Railroad workers did the same thing 100 years ago by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Over 100 years ago, many railroads were tightwads and wouldn't issue new lanterns to conductors and brakemen to replace their aging ones. They finally would ditch their lanterns over a river bridge as they approached the yard limits, then report the lanterns as missing to the yardmaster who would issue them a new lantern.

    --
    Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
  13. Re:Spend money to save money... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's about right. I think my company dropped $50M on a "new brand image" (that looked a lot like the old brand image), another $42M on a new "one size fits all" database that actually doesn't work for almost anything, tens of millions in golden parachutes.

    "Can I get a monitor with a display resolution larger than 1400x900?" "No." "But...but...I can't even see a page of schematics at a time, and the code I'm maintaining is a hundred thousand lines split in to dozens of files!" "The budget is tight, can't do it."

  14. Re:smash by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 4, Funny

    You apparently failed to notice the the phrase 'her replacement'.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  15. Re:Maybe I should try this by grub · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, we have some poor Vista users.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  16. Re:smash by _Shad0w_ · · Score: 2

    "...after that her replacement was the one that received a shiny new one", ie she was fired and whoever got taken on to replace her got the new machine.

    --

    Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.

  17. Re:Spend money to save money... by khr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Can I get a monitor with a display resolution larger than 1400x900?" "No." "But...but...I can't even see a page of schematics at a time, and the code I'm maintaining is a hundred thousand lines split in to dozens of files!" "The budget is tight, can't do it."

    You're asking for the wrong reasons... With a bigger monitor you can show the new brand image more clearly, you can use the extra space to display the image of the new mission statement... You'll always be on track that way, you'll know the schematic you can't see clearly on the screen is driving customer satisfaction and global leadership and all that...

  18. Re:Spend money to save money... by sanosuke001 · · Score: 2

    All of the developers in my area have dual 30" Dell 2560x1600 monitors, overclocked i7 985's, top-of-the-line geForce/radeon/quadro/fireGL cards, and SAS or SSD raids. It definitely shows in our productivity. However, we are a research and development software group and do computer graphics and UI development so maybe we are a bit out of the norm. But it definitely shows how increasing hardware definitely increases productivity.

    --
    -SaNo
  19. As a Manager by MyLongNickName · · Score: 2

    I am an IT Manager. It is important to me that our users are productive and making sure that they are not fighting their means of prodcution is critical in this.

    If someone's PC truly is the problem, it is replaced. When I first started at this company, folks had one monitor, had outdated equipment and there were a lot of legitimate problems that we prioritized and took care of.

    Then you get the whiners. "I need a wireless mouse to be productive". "My coworker has 4GB of RAM and I only have 3GB" (Yeah... I see you playing solitaire two hours a day... I doubt the RAM is your productivity bottleneck). Part of my job is to be the asshole and say no to things. Usually, I win... sometimes I lose :)

    So if a worker has to smash a PC to get a legitimate upgrade, there is an IT problem (that may stem from an Accounting problem). But in many cases, it is a whiny worker who needs to be dealt with.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  20. Just because they say it, doesn't mean they do it. by mr.nobody · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All IT people have heard the joke, "Well, if I take a hammer to it..." But that doesn't mean they do it. From the article, the headline reads as though users are causing deliberate damage to their computers in order to receive an upgrade. Read the actual text however, and while users are saying that, there isn't anything presented to show there are widespread acts of vandalism happening. The only real takeaway from this article is that some UK offices are using significantly outdated equipment. The headline is just sensationalism. I hate to say it, but I think /. fell for this one.

    --
    mr.nobody
    --Don't you wanna go where nobody knows your name?
  21. Re:The Best Way by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow. What a horrible idea. Never, ever, donate money to your employer. And even if you take it with you when you quit, you have donated money to your employer.

    As a manager, it is MY job to give you the tools to make you more productive. If I am not making the right trade-offs, then I am not doing my job. And if I am not doing my job, you shouldn't make me look good by donating from your own pocket.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  22. Re:Maybe I should try this by Zeek40 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    They still launch rockets with VAXes. I worked on the Space Lift Range System Contract for my Internship, and learned the terrifying fact that they're launching giant missiles into space 20 miles from my house with Computers older than me and ancient wire-wrapped TTL chips in perfboard, and basically no one knows what hardware does what anymore because everyone who built the stuff is retired or dead.

    We had a launch control board assembly fail shortly after I started my internship, and a rocket was supposed to go up the next week. No one had any idea where or how to get a replacement, then someone remembered that the old 'backup' system was moved to the Kennedy Space Center Museum. They made a call, grabbed an armed guard from the base, drove up to KSC, swapped the broken control board with the museum piece, and launched a rocket with it a week later. To the best of my knowledge, they are still launching rockets with a piece of hardware literally salvaged from a museum of history.

  23. Re:Same old bottleneck by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I installed Nt 4 on a 75 mHz desktop, thinking I might go MSCE or something. If something was reading the hard disk, I could watch every control get painted. Erase, draw the outline, put the letters on, do a checkbox. Start task manager to see what is taking up the CPU, 20 minutes for that to load. Then I see CPU usage is only about 50%. Why? Windows 98 on the same machine did not have the same problem, so it wasn't the hardware.

    I wish I knew. I get the same thing on Vista with a dual-core 2.5 gHz processor. Outlook refuses to show me meeting info. It's not responding, then slowly responding, then paints the reminder window. Can't see the dial-in number, waiting for it to paint. Get 3 instant messages - are you joining? Yeah, paste me the number and i'll be right there.

    PC backup, antivirus, update scans, hard drive maintenance - any prolonged disk activity brings the computer to a halt. It's not just me - yesterday we had a chief architect say "Id bring that up but my backup just started" and everyone said "oh, yeah we know."

    Simple version: my notebook is slower than my previous XP one, and I just tolerate it until we get the OK to move to Windows 7, and hope it's slightly faster because the processor is faster. It won't be, because it will have a 4 million GB drive at 5400 RPM.

    With Windows NT, storage has always been the bottleneck. At least until you throw enough memory at it that it can hold all your apps plus an ample disk cache. Backup, antivirus, etc. tasks use a lot of non-cached data, and there goes your advantage.

  24. Organizations think PCs are like furniture by cshamis · · Score: 2

    When in fact, they're tools; and, tools eventually wear out or become obsolete. You wouldn't expect a chef to never sharpen his knife, how can anybody expect that computers will continue to "stay sharp" as the day they were installed? We've got over 30 years of evidence that this is not the case. As the OS accumulates service packs and additional add-ons (read: Enterprise malware) eventually everything slows down and makes the machine clunky and awkward. The hardware doesn't change, but the software loads continue to become more demanding; factor in all the new idiot security policies most IT departments dream up, (full disk virus scans in the middle of the workday, password changes every 30 days, emails older than 90 days are deleted, no personal flashdrives, firewall monitoring, 180-day new software approval processes, requiring a "code" to use the color printer, etc.) ---The end result: Frustration, annoyance, anger... like road-rage; we feel that the computer, (like a slow guy blocking the fast lane) is holding us up, and keeping us from accomplishing our goals, and that leads to "keyboard rage." If people are breaking their machines to get upgrades, that's a sure-sign that the organization is failing to provide a suitable IT environment.

  25. Re:1000 years from now by ubrgeek · · Score: 2

    And all of them will still have personally identifiable information that was accidentally left on the hard drives.

    --
    Bark less. Wag more.
  26. Re:smash by Dishevel · · Score: 2

    Or maybe you just read.

    --
    Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
  27. Re:Maybe I should try this by mikechant · · Score: 2

    with XP support ending some time next year.

    2014 actually.

    http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/search/default.aspx?alpha=Windows+XP

  28. Verified in the real world. by PhreakOfTime · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have done exactly this to one of the clients I had.

    It was a small business, with about 10PC's around the office for the agents to use as needed. One of the agents kept whining that this certain computer was 'old' and therefore to slow for him to work on. It was keeping him from getting as much done as he thought he could.... or that was what he kept saying.

    So, we talked with the owner of the company before rolling out our change; A brand new... case. Thats it, new case. Same guts, same hardware, same everything... but the case.

    Suddenly, this was the 'fastest' computer in the office(yes, all the computers were exactly the same hardware), and the complaining stopped(for awhile)

    As was expected, this did NOT increase this persons productivity. As was explained to the owner before the upgrade, this person was using every excuse in the book to get away with doing as little work as possible. It was always some external factor that was the problem. This happens a lot with people who do nothing more than what we lked to call 'play office'. They sit in the required space, show their face, but don't actually contribute anything meaningful but body heat in the winter time.

    By definition, stupid people are EASY to manipulate. Use them to your advantage, or suffer the fools forever.

  29. I hope you also realize though... by Moraelin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I hope you also realize though, that the programs we do today are also much more complex than you could do on punched cards back then. Even small-ish programs can have a million lines of code or more. (Larger ones, more. Windows XP was some 35 million lines, Vista over 50 million, and that's not counting such stuff as C libraries and whatnot.)

    Even at 1 gram per card, and each card being a line of code, a 1 million line program would weigh literally a metric ton. Did you see many people carrying their program to the computer with a small truck?

    Even the kind of internal complexity that went into programs those days was actually a lot lower. E.g., you didn't need to optimize access to shared data for 1000 web sessions at the same time, when the program is run as a sequential batch. (Yes, concurrent stuff did come around too, but later, but not in the days of paper cards.)

    Most such batch programs I've seen actually are just doing some fairly simple calculation in a loop, that nowadays you wouldn't even write a program for. It's stuff that the PHB would do directly in Excel.

    In other words, yeah, I love reading such posts that tell me that someone is too fucking stupid to even understand the difference between programs these days and most programs that were done on punched cards. And probably the 50's-60's and punched cards were the last time they were competent. I really love that kinda PHB, who thinks that because he once did some piss-poor two-level loop on punch cards back then, it means he's qualified to judge modern programs and deadlines. No, really.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  30. Fighting for PC user rights by hellfire · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here let's flip that around a bit, just as another example.

    IT Side - we made up the following reasons that normal users shouldn't be installing programs themselves.
    - Microsoft gave us a document that says we should configure it like this so we did just that.
    - We are too lazy or overworked or underpaid to think too hard about our user's needs
    - We never bothered to ask what user's requirements were, we just assumed it.
    - IT person happens to be PHB's son or fucking PHB on the side.

    User side -
    - I have to be able to do work that my boss has required me to do which is core to the business making money!
    - I need to be able to test certain situations in order to come up with a new means to be more productive and save the company money!
    - Arbitrary restrictions are stifling users for the sake of making IT look good.

    Brain-dead PHB of IT side-
    - "We have a policy and we stick too it and we can't change it."
    - One month later: "We have a policy and we stick to it and we can't change it."
    - One more month later: PHB is out of the office playing golf with someone while you fume over missing yet another deadline.

    Now add in that you might be working in a software development environment, where every IT rep treats you like an office temp and tries to give you access to MS office and internet explorer and nothing else and does absolutely nothing to understand how your own company's software works nor tries to understand what it takes to create, test, and support said software when your own customers have admin rights to their own machine and, funny, you don't, so you can't possibly figure out what their problem is!

    This is just a counter example to your stereotype. People in general are idiots, sometimes they are in IT, sometimes they are in the user base, and sometimes it's both. You can't paint one side with a broad brush and completely blame things like this on them.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  31. Re:smash by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    Less hassle? I love the $95.00 trip charge I add on to every location call. Make it so they can drop it off and I make a lot less? not a chance in hell. If you make it really cheap and easy for the customer, they get careless and start doing things they were told not to.... hey you're cheap now, let's click on every popup in IE!

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  32. Re:smash by Golddess · · Score: 2

    No, I think you read it right.

    Before I read your comment, I was actually thinking she got someone else's old machine and that person got a brand new one, but your interpretation makes more sense.

    --
    "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
  33. Re:Maybe I should try this by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2

    They DO have a good reason to replace it. They don't have the capability to maintain or repair it. They don't have an inventory of spares. It's literally a mission-critical part.

    Even if they keep using it for the time being, they need to develop an alternative (or acquire spares).

    What would have happened if there WASN'T a spare at the museum, or if no one remembered it was there?

    Sometimes you need to replace a part that works fine because you don't have the capability to handle a situation where that part no longer works fine.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  34. Re:smash by HungryHobo · · Score: 2

    I'm told this is unusually bad in the health industry: some med student friends claim that every small practice always seems to have 2 or 3 "pity jobs", people who don't actually do anything useful and only get makework who are invariably related to someone senior or married to someone.

  35. Tossing old guts into a new shiny case by L473ncy · · Score: 2

    OK here's an idea. How about tossing in the guts of the old computer into a new shiny case (complete with LED casefans and everything). Hell, do a complete format of the drive while you're at it and restore everything back to the way it was before all that bloatware the person in question installed. Or not and see if they think their "new computer" is faster. IMO it's all about perception.

  36. Re:Maybe I should try this by Bai+jie · · Score: 2

    Most of the time I'd agree with the above statement, but when NOBODY knows how the damn thing works and its part of a vital system, it may be time to replace it with a system that can be maintained by the current staff.

  37. Re:Maybe I should try this by Zeek40 · · Score: 2

    Here's another good reason to replace it, those VAX systems have maintenance contracts that cost $10k each per year, and there are about 50 of them in a room running different pieces of software needed for the launch. That's $500k a year on fucking maintenance contracts for hardware that has less total processing power, storage, and memory than my cellphone, and consumes more power than a small welding shop.

  38. Re:Maybe I should try this by Kreigaffe · · Score: 3, Funny

    That is both the most awesome and awful thing I have ever heard

    --
    ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|