... and become one of those rare breed of technically competent managers.
(I'm guessing) You've been in the game long enough doing the tech side to have seen "it all", and have an idea of what sort of problems occur and how to make things "right" (or acceptable to the client/business).
Leave the grunt work to the new, younger guys to get experience with and step back a bit.
Still keep up with technical advancements, but you don't need to go into the nitty gritty details.
I think you're being overly optimistic. More likely, their computer will get owned and become so slow and unresponsive, they'll simply buy another one.
Objective-C is nice, gorm is a workalike to interface builder.
Microsoft have everything to lose. Apple have plenty to gain by Microsoft's loss. Openstep has plenty to gain by Microsoft's loss/apple's gain.
OpenStep is a fine platform, but barely anyone seems to be developing for it. Everyone just wants to copy windows.
I'm putting my money where my mouth is too, Have just finished reading a book on Objective-C, bought a Mac Mini, and am going to stick OpenStep on the PC so I can get my feet wet with cross-platform application development for OS/X and OpenStep.
But serious question... why is Openstep apparently shunned so much? There seems to be so much wheel re-development going on, when we could have a platform that is reasonably common between OpenStep, Mac and Iphone...
According to my web logs, most users are running with windows updates TURNED OFF (ie, the majority of IE users hitting my site are from 6.0 or previous).
Did you enforce group (or local) policy on their machine?
Did you apply any of the pre-built microsoft admin templates for security?
Did you make use of IE's security zones
No? Then you haven't tried all ways of trying to secure the box. XP (or any windows really) can be configured to be pretty sure, you just need to know shit from chocolate, pull your finger out and actually DO IT.
Do I like doing that? No. Do I do that? No. But if i was desperate to secure a windows box from idiots, this is the path i'd be going down...
There are ways you can speed it up (google, ie8 speed up) - but yeah, the average end user won't bother and just assume it is shit.
On a clean windows 7 box it is MUCH faster - i suspect 7 has a few things going on behind the scenes that previous OSes don't which make the difference.
However, I'm inclined to agree with the general end user assessment - its pretty shitty compared to the alternatives. I mean, come on now microsoft, its been in development for what... 3 years now (forgetting the past 7 versions for a second), and you still can't pass acid 3? Still can't implement standards that apple (and to a large extend, a bunch of hobbyist developers in the case of Mozilla) has managed to do with a fraction of your development resources?
... not drastically yet, but the alternatives (Chrome, Safari, Mozilla) are beoming more markedly different in performance. Despite what Microsoft may claim with IE8, a typically install over an old windows box is a pig. It runs slowly, locks up the UI whilst seemingly doing nothing while loading pages, etc.
It is *MUCH BETTER* on a clean install or upgrade of Windows 7 (i was shocked at the performance difference, on vista it was a pig, same machine), but there aren't a hell of a lot of windows 7 users out there yet.
Also, the mac is gaining market share, and Safari is actually good on PC with version 4 (for the first time).
Hence, my daily browser of choice is currently Safari 4, as its basically the same between both platforms I regularly use for desktop use, gets 100% in acid 3, is pretty quick, and i'm addicted to coverflow bookmark browsing (thought it was a gimmick until i used it, finding a page by looking at it is SOOO much easier than remembering the title that no one looks at while reading it).
Not going to speak for the guy but I'd say that's likely a fair call. It's painfully apparent (as you say) that a great number of linux developers and/or users have never dealt with that environment, and as such there is no development in that area. Hence my post getting modded "troll" even (rolls eyes).
Solutions to all the problems i listed DO exist on open source operating systems (Linux or FreeBSD for example), but getting it all to actually work seamlessly is a fucking pain in the arse, and involves so much custom scripting and rooting around that if you ever need another admin to learn to maintain your system its pretty difficult to find someone to do it.
For all its faults, Windows has one thing right: a passing knowledge of how to configure and maintain it well enough to "Get shit done" is commonplace. Getting shit done is also possible with a standard platform and plenty of available commercial support.
I'm not saying windows is perfect by any stretch (because its FAR from it), but it is good enough at everything that matters in a corporate environment that people can put up with or work around its faults.
Would I prefer to run linux at work? Sure. OS/X - definitely. But the tools to get basic admin tasks done, report on user behavior, and actually run commercially supported, industry standard apps for various jobs are simply not available elsewhere.
Windows is more complex, yes... but the complexity has benefits. Lets see you do this with your Linux environment, without months or years of rooting around and custom scripts/software and platform compatibility headaches to get it all working.
Software metering
Distributed network policy
single-sign on across multiple continents for every application (web proxy, mail, SQL, file shares, vpn logins, etc)
remote OS/package installation (by simply putting computers/users into groups)
Etc, etc... Yes, it can all be done with open source/linux software, but to get it all to work, well - you're looking at HEAPS of custom in-house software or product choices to make.
I've been using Windows since 1989 and Linux/other unix since 1994, and yes both are getting better. However until linux addresses things like the above, it will remain confined to specific niche deployments or power users. Most of that goes for OS/X as well.
Which OS runs 5-10% faster or uses 20% less ram is no longer really relevant. Its how well it can be centrally controlled and managed across large numbers of machines. Linux is not there yet; I do wish people would start focusing on that though, but its going to have to be fucking impressive to get business users off active directory.
... will bring any platform to its knees. From the article, the speculation is that it was "TradElect" that was the problem, not windows, and that is not confirmed.
Microsoft annoys me as much as the next guy, but blame where blame is due please...
Whilst you have a point, google can leverage their apps to some extent. I don't know many people who don't have at least a gmail account and/or make use of google maps, google earth, etc.
Google simply need to ensure they come out with/maintain first class web apps and that chrome is the browser of choice to run them in due to speed or extra features, or whatever.
Is it going to be difficult? Sure...
Don't forget also that blogger, youtube, google video, etc are all also at Google's disposal. Microsoft might think they can "fucking kill google" with this new data from IE8, but I think they're going to be pressed to do it.
Why? To actually use, IE8 is a pig. Most people will soon figure out that you can speed it up by turning off all the extra shit it sends and receives to/from microsoft. Also, irrespective of whether they push it as a mandatory update or not, the huge numbers of zombie xp machines out there tell me that the majority of windows users don't do updates. Also, the web stats for my corporate websites tell me that 80% of windows users are still on IE6. And if they're not, its Mozilla, Chrome or Safari.
One service google could offer may be hosting, or front side caching (reverse proxy, i.e., you can host your site on a shitty DSL or low capacity hosting link, and google will act as a cache for all your static content to the outside world). This way they still see a heap of web content references, albeit via proxy and not necessarily via search terms...
Either way, I doubt IE8 will take off until windows 7 ships in volume. So google have a year or so to breathe just yet.
Hmm. Why should we use it again? Don't get me wrong, i was a firefox user from way back (when it was called phoenix, up until version 2.x or so), but I just don't see much point lately. Chrome whoops its arse on speed, stability and interface, safari whoops its arse on speed, coverflow bookmarks/history and standards compliance. Sure, firefox has a million plug ins I don't use, but it just fails the basics as far as I'm concerned...
Mod parent up. WE used robocopy. Also, depending on how quick you need to do it, DFS? I've used DFS over some pretty fucking ordinary satellite links on the other side of the world, and whilst it may take its time, stuff eventually does get there, and i'm yet to run into any corruption from it....
Put in a WSUS server, use it (WSUS is free, for fucks sake). Roll out AV everywhere, keep it updated. Get an admin to put in slightly less retarded group policy than default, and don't let users run as admin (would you let them run as root all the time??).
Are there holes? Sure. But you don't get bitten by 99% of them if you follow any sort of basic security policy...
If an enemy faction has blocked your transport route to destination FOO, then allowing you to simply teleport anywhere makes that whole gameplay aspect redundant.
Investment of effort into technologies where MS can break compatibility for two
Newsflash: microsoft can break compatibility with ANY technology if they want to, whether they were the originator or not.
They've done it with Java, they've done it with CSS, they've done it with HTML; fuck, they even did it with ASCII text. If you think that just because.net is a microsoft platform they'll be MORE LIKELY to break it, you're deluded. I'd say they'd be LESS likely to fuck compatibility up, if the huge amount of crap kept in windows soley for compatibility reasons is anything to go by.
Apple stuff generally "just works". When you get older and want to simply get things done, rather than wanking over spec sheets or rooting around with software for the sake of it, apple hardware/software is attactive.
I've recently bought a mini to play with, and I have to say I'm a convert. My next general purpose machine is likely to be an iMac.
My mini is sitting on top of a quad core PC with 4gb of RAM and I'm spending a lot more time on the mini because it's more pleasant to use to actually get things done...
Take a closer look at Windows 7 and Snow Leapord - almost every new UI design concept has been taken directly from KDE4.
Bullshit. snow leopard is not a major change in interface from leopard, and leopard is not MAJOR change in UI since OS/X 10.1 or earlier. Which draws much of its UI from NEXT...
Slashdot Mirror
... and become one of those rare breed of technically competent managers.
(I'm guessing) You've been in the game long enough doing the tech side to have seen "it all", and have an idea of what sort of problems occur and how to make things "right" (or acceptable to the client/business).
Leave the grunt work to the new, younger guys to get experience with and step back a bit.
Still keep up with technical advancements, but you don't need to go into the nitty gritty details.
Anyway, my 2c.
I think you're being overly optimistic. More likely, their computer will get owned and become so slow and unresponsive, they'll simply buy another one.
With Windows on it.
Stupid? Yes. They're end users...
brain fart... openstep = gnustep. i'm going to run gnustep...
Objective-C is nice, gorm is a workalike to interface builder.
Microsoft have everything to lose. Apple have plenty to gain by Microsoft's loss. Openstep has plenty to gain by Microsoft's loss/apple's gain.
OpenStep is a fine platform, but barely anyone seems to be developing for it. Everyone just wants to copy windows.
I'm putting my money where my mouth is too, Have just finished reading a book on Objective-C, bought a Mac Mini, and am going to stick OpenStep on the PC so I can get my feet wet with cross-platform application development for OS/X and OpenStep.
But serious question... why is Openstep apparently shunned so much? There seems to be so much wheel re-development going on, when we could have a platform that is reasonably common between OpenStep, Mac and Iphone...
According to my web logs, most users are running with windows updates TURNED OFF (ie, the majority of IE users hitting my site are from 6.0 or previous).
Pretty SECURE, i meant, not pretty sure. Its early and i'm halfway through my coffee... :-\
No? Then you haven't tried all ways of trying to secure the box. XP (or any windows really) can be configured to be pretty sure, you just need to know shit from chocolate, pull your finger out and actually DO IT.
Do I like doing that? No. Do I do that? No. But if i was desperate to secure a windows box from idiots, this is the path i'd be going down...
There are ways you can speed it up (google, ie8 speed up) - but yeah, the average end user won't bother and just assume it is shit.
On a clean windows 7 box it is MUCH faster - i suspect 7 has a few things going on behind the scenes that previous OSes don't which make the difference.
However, I'm inclined to agree with the general end user assessment - its pretty shitty compared to the alternatives. I mean, come on now microsoft, its been in development for what... 3 years now (forgetting the past 7 versions for a second), and you still can't pass acid 3? Still can't implement standards that apple (and to a large extend, a bunch of hobbyist developers in the case of Mozilla) has managed to do with a fraction of your development resources?
More scary, is that according to my web logs, probably 80% of the IE users are still back on IE6 or previous.
I.e., its quite likely they're on un-patched windows XP boxes... hence the fertile botnet ground out there.
It is *MUCH BETTER* on a clean install or upgrade of Windows 7 (i was shocked at the performance difference, on vista it was a pig, same machine), but there aren't a hell of a lot of windows 7 users out there yet.
Also, the mac is gaining market share, and Safari is actually good on PC with version 4 (for the first time).
Hence, my daily browser of choice is currently Safari 4, as its basically the same between both platforms I regularly use for desktop use, gets 100% in acid 3, is pretty quick, and i'm addicted to coverflow bookmark browsing (thought it was a gimmick until i used it, finding a page by looking at it is SOOO much easier than remembering the title that no one looks at while reading it).
If i'm on a free nix box its generally Firefox...
... there are these buildings called "libraries".
Solutions to all the problems i listed DO exist on open source operating systems (Linux or FreeBSD for example), but getting it all to actually work seamlessly is a fucking pain in the arse, and involves so much custom scripting and rooting around that if you ever need another admin to learn to maintain your system its pretty difficult to find someone to do it.
For all its faults, Windows has one thing right: a passing knowledge of how to configure and maintain it well enough to "Get shit done" is commonplace. Getting shit done is also possible with a standard platform and plenty of available commercial support.
I'm not saying windows is perfect by any stretch (because its FAR from it), but it is good enough at everything that matters in a corporate environment that people can put up with or work around its faults.
Would I prefer to run linux at work? Sure. OS/X - definitely. But the tools to get basic admin tasks done, report on user behavior, and actually run commercially supported, industry standard apps for various jobs are simply not available elsewhere.
Etc, etc... Yes, it can all be done with open source/linux software, but to get it all to work, well - you're looking at HEAPS of custom in-house software or product choices to make.
I've been using Windows since 1989 and Linux/other unix since 1994, and yes both are getting better. However until linux addresses things like the above, it will remain confined to specific niche deployments or power users. Most of that goes for OS/X as well.
Which OS runs 5-10% faster or uses 20% less ram is no longer really relevant. Its how well it can be centrally controlled and managed across large numbers of machines. Linux is not there yet; I do wish people would start focusing on that though, but its going to have to be fucking impressive to get business users off active directory.
Microsoft annoys me as much as the next guy, but blame where blame is due please...
Whilst you have a point, google can leverage their apps to some extent. I don't know many people who don't have at least a gmail account and/or make use of google maps, google earth, etc.
Google simply need to ensure they come out with/maintain first class web apps and that chrome is the browser of choice to run them in due to speed or extra features, or whatever.
Is it going to be difficult? Sure...
Don't forget also that blogger, youtube, google video, etc are all also at Google's disposal. Microsoft might think they can "fucking kill google" with this new data from IE8, but I think they're going to be pressed to do it.
Why? To actually use, IE8 is a pig. Most people will soon figure out that you can speed it up by turning off all the extra shit it sends and receives to/from microsoft. Also, irrespective of whether they push it as a mandatory update or not, the huge numbers of zombie xp machines out there tell me that the majority of windows users don't do updates. Also, the web stats for my corporate websites tell me that 80% of windows users are still on IE6. And if they're not, its Mozilla, Chrome or Safari.
One service google could offer may be hosting, or front side caching (reverse proxy, i.e., you can host your site on a shitty DSL or low capacity hosting link, and google will act as a cache for all your static content to the outside world). This way they still see a heap of web content references, albeit via proxy and not necessarily via search terms...
Either way, I doubt IE8 will take off until windows 7 ships in volume. So google have a year or so to breathe just yet.
... will it blend?
Hmm. Why should we use it again? Don't get me wrong, i was a firefox user from way back (when it was called phoenix, up until version 2.x or so), but I just don't see much point lately. Chrome whoops its arse on speed, stability and interface, safari whoops its arse on speed, coverflow bookmarks/history and standards compliance. Sure, firefox has a million plug ins I don't use, but it just fails the basics as far as I'm concerned...
Disposing of, and manufacturing the flypaper is probably more convenient. Less lead and zinc involved you see....
Mod parent up. WE used robocopy. Also, depending on how quick you need to do it, DFS? I've used DFS over some pretty fucking ordinary satellite links on the other side of the world, and whilst it may take its time, stuff eventually does get there, and i'm yet to run into any corruption from it....
Are there holes? Sure. But you don't get bitten by 99% of them if you follow any sort of basic security policy...
... a massive "Thank-you, you dumb bastards."
If an enemy faction has blocked your transport route to destination FOO, then allowing you to simply teleport anywhere makes that whole gameplay aspect redundant.
Newsflash: microsoft can break compatibility with ANY technology if they want to, whether they were the originator or not.
They've done it with Java, they've done it with CSS, they've done it with HTML; fuck, they even did it with ASCII text. If you think that just because .net is a microsoft platform they'll be MORE LIKELY to break it, you're deluded. I'd say they'd be LESS likely to fuck compatibility up, if the huge amount of crap kept in windows soley for compatibility reasons is anything to go by.
Apple stuff generally "just works". When you get older and want to simply get things done, rather than wanking over spec sheets or rooting around with software for the sake of it, apple hardware/software is attactive.
I've recently bought a mini to play with, and I have to say I'm a convert. My next general purpose machine is likely to be an iMac.
My mini is sitting on top of a quad core PC with 4gb of RAM and I'm spending a lot more time on the mini because it's more pleasant to use to actually get things done...
Bullshit. snow leopard is not a major change in interface from leopard, and leopard is not MAJOR change in UI since OS/X 10.1 or earlier. Which draws much of its UI from NEXT...