I don't know about the rest of you, but my daily slashdot break is the few things that keeps me from quitting my miserable tech job.
If I didn't take 15 minutes out of each work day to chill out and read something interesting technology stories, I probably would have flipped out and strangled my bosses a long time ago!
(Come to think of it, that might have IMPROVED the companies productivity! Perhaps there is something to this idea after all.)
I can't help but be curious. Considering that Apple is mostly a marketing-focused company, they probably just want to cherry pick the most frequent questions and favorable comments for use in their commercials.
It would be nice if some of these comments are used to incorporate new features, but then I've also noticed that it's been awhile since I've seen a good "PC Bashing" commercial campaign from Apple. I have a hunch that they're just using us Slashdotter-types for free market research, but I hope that I'm wrong about that.
If you REALLY think that you're going to deploy 4000 servers in the next few years, you'll need a practical naming scheme to keep track of them all. Sure, Star Wars characters and literary refrences are fun, but you'll quickly run out of good and meaningful names quickly. Good luck finding "Yoda96" when it needs to be rebooted!:)
Here's the naming convention that I use at work:
Two or 3 letter Department Abbreviation: Like HR, ACC, or PR
2 letters for type = Like DE for development, TE for testing, or PD for production
3 numbers for server number... 0 through 999.
So, the second Accounting development server would be accde002.domain.com. Keep the servers grouped together, and it makes things much easier to find.
You know this publicly-traded company is screwed when stoops to begging for donations to stay afloat! It's not like these guys are a bunch of hackers banging out code in their spare time, this is a corporation that should have the financial smarts to keep a few months of cash in reserve. Hey, I like Mandrake as much as the next guy, but it's obvious that their programmers are FAR more talent than their accounting and PR staff.
I wonder what their few remaining stockholders think of this obvious mis-management of funding? I'd bail out now, before this company becomes nothing more than a headline on fuckedcompany.com.
Not to mention that Windows security holes are more frequently exploited, causing more overall damage.
Hell, If I was a script kiddie or virus writer, I'd probably choose to go after Windows exploits over UNIX exploits, too! There is a larger installed base of Windows servers and client systems than there is for any other single platform, and most Windows sys admins are either too stupid or too lazy to patch their systems.
1) Admitting that Microsoft is even partly liable for problems caused by it's software would leave them wide open for litigation. I'll bet that there are thousands of companies who would like to be reembrused for all the work the needed to do to clean up the aftermath of Melissa/Code Red/etc.
2) Bill Gates making such a statement in public would be headline technology news, but something that show up as a blurb in some obscure tech journal. It would also probably cause Microsoft stock to drop 10 points, which is something that Bill would NEVER let happen.
Come on. Please READ this stupid joke of a press release, and tell me that you think that it sounds real. The last line of the story itself should be a dead giveaway:
"Describing the state of computing today as unstable and unreliable, he said Microsoft chairman Bill Gates 'is really annoyed by the incredible pain we put everyone through in computing.' "
Puhleeze! Has Bill EVER personally apologized for releasing buggy software in the past? Why do think that he would NOW?!? Come on, Slashdot editors, stop being so gullible.
Even if AOL left Red Hat alone, it would still probably slow down the development of new products. For an example, look what happened when AOL bought Netscape. Many of their programmers and members of upper management fled, which probably added extra year to the development time of Netscape 6.
Like Netscape, Red Hat's and AOL/TW's corporate cultures are completely different. You can expect management conflicts, transition headaches, and dozens of developers fleeing from a corporate bethmoth that is more interested in making money than developing cool products.
What did RJ do to piss off his IT Manager? Sure, I'll bet that we've all been victims of age discrimination at one time or another, like being expected to work longer hours and take on crummier projects than the "old folks". That said, I've rarely seen anyone fired for being too young, unless there is a reasonable explanation behind it.
We can only take guesses from what the story that has been told, but I'd imagine that something more than a clash of egos is going on here. Perhaps RJ has been gloating that he knows more than his co-workers to the wrong people, or that his skills really aren't quite as good as he thinks they are. Any 19 year old who says that he has 5 years experience raises suspicion immediately. Maybe he's been bad-mouthing his manager behind his back, the manager knows, and he's angry about it. Considering that RJ has posted his problems to Slashdot for the whole world to see, it's pretty obvious he isn't one of those people who like to keep his feelings to himself.
Or, maybe RJ is just overreacting to some rumors that he heard. Some people just like gossip to start trouble, and younger employees are usually the first to fall for it. Who knows, maybe his boss really DOES hate his guts, and really is out to get him! I doubt it, and would need some more proof before I completely believe RJ's story. That's one of the biggest problems with these "Ask Slashdot" posts, as you rarely get to hear both sides of an issue.
Re:Okay... so we can't fix the software or the use
on
Clever New Windows Worm
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
You've never done corporate IT support, have you? Even if you could convince the pointy-haired bosses to accept these draconian security restrictions, the employees would attempt lynch you for it. Business people don't like being told what they CAN'T do! They aren't like apthetic college students, who usually care less about the rules (unless it affects their precious beer supply).
If a manager (Or a sales guy, or an accountant, whatever) is used to using IE at home and sending e-mails with pretty fonts and pictures attached, they'll demand that they can do it at work. They'll want to be able to read Word attachments from outside sources, and share files with their co-workers. If you say no, they'll just keep complaining louder to your manager and your manager's managers until someone forces you to cave in to their demands. Most of your changes will get shot down, and you'll put up with a lot of grief in the process.
Most users don't give a rats ass about security, they just want to be able to do their jobs as quickly and easily as possible. If you try to get in their way, they'll fight you on every change until you get frustrated and give up.
That's why it's important to make SMALL security improvements, and make them slowly. Start by blocking certain attachments on the server side, and continously remind people not to click on unknown files. Make sure that your virus software runs automatic scans, and updates itself automatically. The users aren't going to do it for themselves, or at least not until they are already infected. Warn constantly, but never try to FORCE anything on your users unless it's absolutely necessary. The nastier you get, the more that they'll start ignoring you.
Seriously, every accountant that I ever meant was a major tightwad. For example, I knew this one accountant that refused to get cheese on his daily $2.99 "budget" hamburger combo. I once asked him why, and got this long winded speech about how saving the 25 cents a day will give him an extra $4,000 of retirement savings! He even wrote down on a napkin his formula on how the compound interest will multiply his ~$50 a year savings over the years. I left the lunch room amazed this the amount of thought that he put into to this. Some people are thrify, but this man raised it to an art form.
So, back to my point. When given the choice of paying $99 for Quickbooks or downloading and installing SQL Ledger for free, which choice is this crusty old accountant going to go for? You know that he'll be going for cheaper option, because it gives him a few more bucks to scrape together for retirement. Sure, he'll never spend a penny of it once he retires, but at least his kids will be rich when he dies.
Joel forgot to mention that there are some good times to throw out old code:
* If the existing program is written in some old, obscure programming language (like Forth or INTERCAL), and no one on the existing programming team knows how to read it, rewrite. Unless the program is HUGE, it's probably cheaper to rewrite it than hire a new programmer that knows how to change it.
* If the existing software has more bugs and incompatibilities than features that still work as originally intended, rewrite. Let's face it, some code is SOOO bad that it just isn't worth fixing.
* If the code is poorly commented, or doesn't adhere to the most basic modern programming conventions (I'm thinking GOTO loops, 2 letter variables, and line numbers here), scrap it. You'll drive the programmers nuts trying to figure it out and fix it.
* If using the existing code requires buying thousands of dollars worth of proprietary middleware and conversion software to make it work on a new platform, rewrite. Joel mentioned this one to some extent, but some pointy haired bosses out there just don't realize how much more complex and problematic a system can become once you start adding machines who's sole purpose is to act as a gateway or translate data between formats. Trust me, I have personal experience with this one.
Only problem with this idea is that Covad declared chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in August. They aren't in very good financial shape, either, and could also cut you off your service in a few months. Check out the story here
You just might end up trading one failing ISP for another.
According to the disclaimer screen at the end of the show, all of the charities get at least $10,000. So, even though Wil lost, EFF still gets some money. Besides, the free publicity that Wil just gave EFF is probably worth much more than the donation.
Everyone also got paid union scale to appear on the show, so Wil got a few bucks out of the deal, as well.
I never really considered Slashdot a news site, because it is more of an online topic discussion forum. The hosts of the site post stories and articles from OTHER news sits, and we comment on them.
Many of the comments are based on personal opinion, slanted to promote a specific viewpoint, contain outdated or incorrect facts, or are outright bold-faced lies. I wouldn't consider much of the content here to be newsworthy material, even if it gets a 4 or 5 score. I won't even bother to mention what I think of all the "first post!" attempts or troll postings. Thank goodness for moderation.
In short, Slashdot is a nice place to find out about new ideas and technology, but it hardly counts as a legit news site. The Chinese will probably ban it anyway, however, because some of the ideas discussed here about personal freedoms wouldn't be very popular with officals over there.
Having your stock delisted also has a signifigant impact on a company's credit rating. The company would then have a harder time getting a loan if it runs low on cash, and will pay a higher interest rate for that loan if it is necessary.
It should also be mentioned that many businesses are afraid to work with a company that has the perception of going out of business in a few months. They will sign fewer long-term contracts or partnerships for their products and services, and almost no one will want to count on them as a support provider.
This is why over 90% of all companies fail after being delisted from a major stock exchange. It often starts a devistating chain-reaction which ultimately leads to bankruptcy.
Modifying an executable to improve performance for a particular piece of hardware is BAD idea. Besides the potential of adding additional bugs and incompatibilities to the software, you could add future problems with upgrades. Will you be happy if your copy of Quake 3 stops working if you change to a different video card? Or, what happens when you can't install the latest Quake 3 patch, because the checksum on your game executable doesn't match? The small performance benefit isn't worth the heap of problems that it can cause, and it could cause other hardware manufacturers to pull the same stunts with their devices. I'm not looking forward to the day when my Sound Blaster "customized" copy of Unreal 2 to starts causing conflicts with my Intel "enhanced" copy of DirectX 9, and neither should you.
This is the most poorly thought out idea in Video cards since the See-Through NVidia drivers from ASUS.
Kudos, Slashdot, you beat all of other tech news sites to the punch! No of those pesky holidays slow you guys down, do you?:)
Seriously, this merger should pose some serious competition for Dell and IBM. Once you combine the sales, a merged HP and Compaq makes the worlds largest computer hardware manufacturer. Dell and IBM, running neck and neck for 1st in overall hardware sales, now get bumped back to 2nd and 3rd.
Both HP and Compaq also had relatively small but quickly growing service consulting arms, but the combination of the two should give IBM and Accenture a rough time.
Unfortunately, neither company had a huge showing in software, so Microsoft shouldn't be TOO worried by this.
True, but those 386's and 486's STILL have outdated video and network cards. There is no way in hell that they are going to run StarOffice or Mozilla half as fast as a mid-range Pentium III, regardless of how fast the server that they are connecting to is.
But, like I said in my earlier post, speed is only one of the issues. Added support costs due to older equipment failure, training costs for the new system, and irritating the users by taking away their stand-alone system are all reasons why this is a bad idea.
The author of this article seems to totally ignore the loss of productivity and morale of employees by forcing them to use older equipment as Linux terminals.
Let's cover the points on morale first:
Do you want a four year old computer on YOUR desk? Of course not. You don't care if the IT manager says that it meets your needs, you just want to get your work done as quickly and easily as possible. If I tried this implimentation in my shop, I'd expect to field complaints from dozens of users saying that "their e-mail and Netscape is taking too long to load". If they bitched loud and long enough, their boss will give them the 1.4 Ghz that they want, but not without giving everyone a bunch of headaches first.
Many of these people have faster computers at home, so they're used to having better desktop performance than what a Pentium 200 with 128MB of RAM can offer.
Now, the points on productivity:
Not only will these workers be very annoyed when a slow computer is put on their desk, but their work output will suffer as they wait an extra thirty minutes each day for their applications to load and to save their information. Most of these people are being payed $20+ an hour, so the cost savings from buying cheap equipment will be sucked up quickly.
Also, If the user is a current Windows user, they'll need to be re-trained for both Linux and it's office applications. It might over a week for the less-skilled workers to get the hang of it. While they are learning, don't expect them to be happy about this, either.
Older computers tend to break down more, as well, and without warrantees that support cost is coming out of the companies pocket.
In short, this article makes the critical mistake of putting your users FIRST when planning an IT solution. Keeping your employees/customers productive and happy is a LOT more expensive than most companies IT costs. If you try to pass off cheap PC's on your workers, you'll pay for it tenfold with creating tons of new problems.
"ME, Win2k, 98, XP all have different interfaces! Figuring out how to use them is a pain."
What a load of crap. ME and Win2K have almost identical interfaces! Win9x or XP's interfaces are also quite simular. Hell, you can even set up XP to look like Win2K if the eye candy bothers you all that much.
Sure, some start menu options or control panel settings have changed, but it isn't anything that the average user can't figure out in an hour. Compare that to switching from Win9x to KDE or GNOME, where the entire interface will be different, along with most of the user's day-to-day applications. Most people would need a full day of training before they could figure out how to get any work done on their own.
"If me and my wife can use Linux, anyone can."
Don't compare an entire organization to just you and your wife. A fully-staffed company takes much longer to retrain than just a few people, and you'll encounter resistance from people who don't WANT to change. Many people have used Windows for their entire computing career, and will naturally be afraid to switch to something different. THEY won't care it it's cheaper or more stable, they just want to get their work done with a minimum of hassles.
I'm not saying that switching to Linux on the desktop is a totally BAD idea, but don't expect it to be as easy as switching over your home computer.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about the rest of you, but my daily slashdot break is the few things that keeps me from quitting my miserable tech job.
If I didn't take 15 minutes out of each work day to chill out and read something interesting technology stories, I probably would have flipped out and strangled my bosses a long time ago!
(Come to think of it, that might have IMPROVED the companies productivity! Perhaps there is something to this idea after all.)
I can't help but be curious. Considering that Apple is mostly a marketing-focused company, they probably just want to cherry pick the most frequent questions and favorable comments for use in their commercials.
It would be nice if some of these comments are used to incorporate new features, but then I've also noticed that it's been awhile since I've seen a good "PC Bashing" commercial campaign from Apple. I have a hunch that they're just using us Slashdotter-types for free market research, but I hope that I'm wrong about that.
"So, you can park your laptop, order a burger/beer, then email in a movie review all w/o disturbing your fellow patrons. Cool! :)"
PLEASE tell me that that they're NOT opening a theatre like this where Jon Katz lives. His reviews are bad enough already!
If you REALLY think that you're going to deploy 4000 servers in the next few years, you'll need a practical naming scheme to keep track of them all. Sure, Star Wars characters and literary refrences are fun, but you'll quickly run out of good and meaningful names quickly. Good luck finding "Yoda96" when it needs to be rebooted! :)
Here's the naming convention that I use at work:
Two or 3 letter Department Abbreviation: Like HR, ACC, or PR
2 letters for type = Like DE for development, TE for testing, or PD for production
3 numbers for server number... 0 through 999.
So, the second Accounting development server would be accde002.domain.com. Keep the servers grouped together, and it makes things much easier to find.
You know this publicly-traded company is screwed when stoops to begging for donations to stay afloat! It's not like these guys are a bunch of hackers banging out code in their spare time, this is a corporation that should have the financial smarts to keep a few months of cash in reserve. Hey, I like Mandrake as much as the next guy, but it's obvious that their programmers are FAR more talent than their accounting and PR staff.
I wonder what their few remaining stockholders think of this obvious mis-management of funding? I'd bail out now, before this company becomes nothing more than a headline on fuckedcompany.com.
Not to mention that Windows security holes are more frequently exploited, causing more overall damage.
Hell, If I was a script kiddie or virus writer, I'd probably choose to go after Windows exploits over UNIX exploits, too! There is a larger installed base of Windows servers and client systems than there is for any other single platform, and most Windows sys admins are either too stupid or too lazy to patch their systems.
I can think of two right away:
1) Admitting that Microsoft is even partly liable for problems caused by it's software would leave them wide open for litigation. I'll bet that there are thousands of companies who would like to be reembrused for all the work the needed to do to clean up the aftermath of Melissa/Code Red/etc.
2) Bill Gates making such a statement in public would be headline technology news, but something that show up as a blurb in some obscure tech journal. It would also probably cause Microsoft stock to drop 10 points, which is something that Bill would NEVER let happen.
Come on. Please READ this stupid joke of a press release, and tell me that you think that it sounds real. The last line of the story itself should be a dead giveaway:
"Describing the state of computing today as unstable and unreliable, he said Microsoft chairman Bill Gates 'is really annoyed by the incredible pain we put everyone through in computing.' "
Puhleeze! Has Bill EVER personally apologized for releasing buggy software in the past? Why do think that he would NOW?!? Come on, Slashdot editors, stop being so gullible.
Even if AOL left Red Hat alone, it would still probably slow down the development of new products. For an example, look what happened when AOL bought Netscape. Many of their programmers and members of upper management fled, which probably added extra year to the development time of Netscape 6.
Like Netscape, Red Hat's and AOL/TW's corporate cultures are completely different. You can expect management conflicts, transition headaches, and dozens of developers fleeing from a corporate bethmoth that is more interested in making money than developing cool products.
What did RJ do to piss off his IT Manager? Sure, I'll bet that we've all been victims of age discrimination at one time or another, like being expected to work longer hours and take on crummier projects than the "old folks". That said, I've rarely seen anyone fired for being too young, unless there is a reasonable explanation behind it.
We can only take guesses from what the story that has been told, but I'd imagine that something more than a clash of egos is going on here. Perhaps RJ has been gloating that he knows more than his co-workers to the wrong people, or that his skills really aren't quite as good as he thinks they are. Any 19 year old who says that he has 5 years experience raises suspicion immediately. Maybe he's been bad-mouthing his manager behind his back, the manager knows, and he's angry about it. Considering that RJ has posted his problems to Slashdot for the whole world to see, it's pretty obvious he isn't one of those people who like to keep his feelings to himself.
Or, maybe RJ is just overreacting to some rumors that he heard. Some people just like gossip to start trouble, and younger employees are usually the first to fall for it. Who knows, maybe his boss really DOES hate his guts, and really is out to get him! I doubt it, and would need some more proof before I completely believe RJ's story. That's one of the biggest problems with these "Ask Slashdot" posts, as you rarely get to hear both sides of an issue.
You've never done corporate IT support, have you? Even if you could convince the pointy-haired bosses to accept these draconian security restrictions, the employees would attempt lynch you for it. Business people don't like being told what they CAN'T do! They aren't like apthetic college students, who usually care less about the rules (unless it affects their precious beer supply).
If a manager (Or a sales guy, or an accountant, whatever) is used to using IE at home and sending e-mails with pretty fonts and pictures attached, they'll demand that they can do it at work. They'll want to be able to read Word attachments from outside sources, and share files with their co-workers. If you say no, they'll just keep complaining louder to your manager and your manager's managers until someone forces you to cave in to their demands. Most of your changes will get shot down, and you'll put up with a lot of grief in the process.
Most users don't give a rats ass about security, they just want to be able to do their jobs as quickly and easily as possible. If you try to get in their way, they'll fight you on every change until you get frustrated and give up.
That's why it's important to make SMALL security improvements, and make them slowly. Start by blocking certain attachments on the server side, and continously remind people not to click on unknown files. Make sure that your virus software runs automatic scans, and updates itself automatically. The users aren't going to do it for themselves, or at least not until they are already infected. Warn constantly, but never try to FORCE anything on your users unless it's absolutely necessary. The nastier you get, the more that they'll start ignoring you.
Yes, but you're forgetting one thing...
These people are also cheap!
Seriously, every accountant that I ever meant was a major tightwad. For example, I knew this one accountant that refused to get cheese on his daily $2.99 "budget" hamburger combo. I once asked him why, and got this long winded speech about how saving the 25 cents a day will give him an extra $4,000 of retirement savings! He even wrote down on a napkin his formula on how the compound interest will multiply his ~$50 a year savings over the years. I left the lunch room amazed this the amount of thought that he put into to this. Some people are thrify, but this man raised it to an art form.
So, back to my point. When given the choice of paying $99 for Quickbooks or downloading and installing SQL Ledger for free, which choice is this crusty old accountant going to go for? You know that he'll be going for cheaper option, because it gives him a few more bucks to scrape together for retirement. Sure, he'll never spend a penny of it once he retires, but at least his kids will be rich when he dies.
Joel forgot to mention that there are some good times to throw out old code:
* If the existing program is written in some old, obscure programming language (like Forth or INTERCAL), and no one on the existing programming team knows how to read it, rewrite. Unless the program is HUGE, it's probably cheaper to rewrite it than hire a new programmer that knows how to change it.
* If the existing software has more bugs and incompatibilities than features that still work as originally intended, rewrite. Let's face it, some code is SOOO bad that it just isn't worth fixing.
* If the code is poorly commented, or doesn't adhere to the most basic modern programming conventions (I'm thinking GOTO loops, 2 letter variables, and line numbers here), scrap it. You'll drive the programmers nuts trying to figure it out and fix it.
* If using the existing code requires buying thousands of dollars worth of proprietary middleware and conversion software to make it work on a new platform, rewrite. Joel mentioned this one to some extent, but some pointy haired bosses out there just don't realize how much more complex and problematic a system can become once you start adding machines who's sole purpose is to act as a gateway or translate data between formats. Trust me, I have personal experience with this one.
You just might end up trading one failing ISP for another.
Levar played for an LA chapter Junior Achievement.
According to the disclaimer screen at the end of the show, all of the charities get at least $10,000. So, even though Wil lost, EFF still gets some money. Besides, the free publicity that Wil just gave EFF is probably worth much more than the donation.
Everyone also got paid union scale to appear on the show, so Wil got a few bucks out of the deal, as well.
I never really considered Slashdot a news site, because it is more of an online topic discussion forum. The hosts of the site post stories and articles from OTHER news sits, and we comment on them.
Many of the comments are based on personal opinion, slanted to promote a specific viewpoint, contain outdated or incorrect facts, or are outright bold-faced lies. I wouldn't consider much of the content here to be newsworthy material, even if it gets a 4 or 5 score. I won't even bother to mention what I think of all the "first post!" attempts or troll postings. Thank goodness for moderation.
In short, Slashdot is a nice place to find out about new ideas and technology, but it hardly counts as a legit news site. The Chinese will probably ban it anyway, however, because some of the ideas discussed here about personal freedoms wouldn't be very popular with officals over there.
I'm disappointed! It took a whole DAY for someone to disassemble an XBOX, and post pictures on the web for everyone to see? What took so long?!?
At this slow pace, it might take over a MONTH to get a custom Linux distribution running on it!
Come on guys, hurry up! I had my heart set on building an XBOX web server running Apache before Christmas.
Having your stock delisted also has a signifigant impact on a company's credit rating. The company would then have a harder time getting a loan if it runs low on cash, and will pay a higher interest rate for that loan if it is necessary.
It should also be mentioned that many businesses are afraid to work with a company that has the perception of going out of business in a few months. They will sign fewer long-term contracts or partnerships for their products and services, and almost no one will want to count on them as a support provider.
This is why over 90% of all companies fail after being delisted from a major stock exchange. It often starts a devistating chain-reaction which ultimately leads to bankruptcy.
Modifying an executable to improve performance for a particular piece of hardware is BAD idea. Besides the potential of adding additional bugs and incompatibilities to the software, you could add future problems with upgrades. Will you be happy if your copy of Quake 3 stops working if you change to a different video card? Or, what happens when you can't install the latest Quake 3 patch, because the checksum on your game executable doesn't match? The small performance benefit isn't worth the heap of problems that it can cause, and it could cause other hardware manufacturers to pull the same stunts with their devices. I'm not looking forward to the day when my Sound Blaster "customized" copy of Unreal 2 to starts causing conflicts with my Intel "enhanced" copy of DirectX 9, and neither should you.
This is the most poorly thought out idea in Video cards since the See-Through NVidia drivers from ASUS.
Yeah, by the time this war is over, they'll have to rename the country to "Stan". Why? Because there won't be any Afgans left! :)
Kudos, Slashdot, you beat all of other tech news sites to the punch! No of those pesky holidays slow you guys down, do you? :)
Seriously, this merger should pose some serious competition for Dell and IBM. Once you combine the sales, a merged HP and Compaq makes the worlds largest computer hardware manufacturer. Dell and IBM, running neck and neck for 1st in overall hardware sales, now get bumped back to 2nd and 3rd.
Both HP and Compaq also had relatively small but quickly growing service consulting arms, but the combination of the two should give IBM and Accenture a rough time.
Unfortunately, neither company had a huge showing in software, so Microsoft shouldn't be TOO worried by this.
True, but those 386's and 486's STILL have outdated video and network cards. There is no way in hell that they are going to run StarOffice or Mozilla half as fast as a mid-range Pentium III, regardless of how fast the server that they are connecting to is.
But, like I said in my earlier post, speed is only one of the issues. Added support costs due to older equipment failure, training costs for the new system, and irritating the users by taking away their stand-alone system are all reasons why this is a bad idea.
Let's cover the points on morale first:
Do you want a four year old computer on YOUR desk? Of course not. You don't care if the IT manager says that it meets your needs, you just want to get your work done as quickly and easily as possible. If I tried this implimentation in my shop, I'd expect to field complaints from dozens of users saying that "their e-mail and Netscape is taking too long to load". If they bitched loud and long enough, their boss will give them the 1.4 Ghz that they want, but not without giving everyone a bunch of headaches first.
Many of these people have faster computers at home, so they're used to having better desktop performance than what a Pentium 200 with 128MB of RAM can offer.
Now, the points on productivity:
Not only will these workers be very annoyed when a slow computer is put on their desk, but their work output will suffer as they wait an extra thirty minutes each day for their applications to load and to save their information. Most of these people are being payed $20+ an hour, so the cost savings from buying cheap equipment will be sucked up quickly.
Also, If the user is a current Windows user, they'll need to be re-trained for both Linux and it's office applications. It might over a week for the less-skilled workers to get the hang of it. While they are learning, don't expect them to be happy about this, either.
Older computers tend to break down more, as well, and without warrantees that support cost is coming out of the companies pocket.
In short, this article makes the critical mistake of putting your users FIRST when planning an IT solution. Keeping your employees/customers productive and happy is a LOT more expensive than most companies IT costs. If you try to pass off cheap PC's on your workers, you'll pay for it tenfold with creating tons of new problems.
What a load of crap. ME and Win2K have almost identical interfaces! Win9x or XP's interfaces are also quite simular. Hell, you can even set up XP to look like Win2K if the eye candy bothers you all that much.
Sure, some start menu options or control panel settings have changed, but it isn't anything that the average user can't figure out in an hour. Compare that to switching from Win9x to KDE or GNOME, where the entire interface will be different, along with most of the user's day-to-day applications. Most people would need a full day of training before they could figure out how to get any work done on their own.
"If me and my wife can use Linux, anyone can."
Don't compare an entire organization to just you and your wife. A fully-staffed company takes much longer to retrain than just a few people, and you'll encounter resistance from people who don't WANT to change. Many people have used Windows for their entire computing career, and will naturally be afraid to switch to something different. THEY won't care it it's cheaper or more stable, they just want to get their work done with a minimum of hassles.
I'm not saying that switching to Linux on the desktop is a totally BAD idea, but don't expect it to be as easy as switching over your home computer.