I'm kind of frightened that I may become the grumpy IT guy who doesn't like change. I love some of the underlying features of Office '07 and Windows 7 on paper, but I really had to force myself to try to use the new UIs without immediately tweaking the hell out of everything or reverting to an older version.
Bullet proof windows not as safe as previously thought. Under certain conditions, such as a door being unlocked and/or open, a bullet proof window may not keep you safe from robbery at gunpoint.
I know a lot of people who "know a guy" when it comes to safety inspections. They're perfectly happy paying him $20 to slap a sticker on the car and call it a day.
I love when non-technical people attempt to regulate technology policies, especially when it's based on hearsay. Don't get me wrong, I've got plenty of issues with Windows Vista, but shouldn't the Texas IT department be handling these decisions? I realize that they may initiate the process, but what's the point of creating another hoop for them to jump through? I doubt the senate has any clue as to what goes on behind the scenes in their IT department's dealings with Windows.
In addition to the previously mentioned incidents, Conficker managed to take down icanhascheezburger.com via DDoS attack. Employee productivity quickly upshifted in many organizations, as they now had nothing to do but work.
I think this differs in the department of accountability. When one pirates music, he/she is solely responsible for his or her own actions, whereas the poster is dealing with piracy at work. He or she could be held accountable for the unlicensed installation of software in the duties of his job, which no employer should ask of an employee. (I do realize that he or she has not been asked to do so, I was simply making a point.)
Unfortunately, I don't think I clarified what I meant by "crossing that bridge." The point I was trying to make was that from a user standpoint, it is unreasonable to stop using a piece of software solely because vulnerabilities may present themselves. I am not advocating that nothing be done to address the vulnerabilities before viruses are written, nor do I advocate doing nothing to protect yourself from said viruses.
As I cannot disagree with your point, I feel it merely comes down to a philosophical issue. Does one not cross the street for fear of being hit by a car?
Perhaps you should not constantly worry about viruses written for a piece of software very few people use and cross the bridge of dealing with such a virus when it happens.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought everyone knew that the Plow King is where it's at.
I'm kind of frightened that I may become the grumpy IT guy who doesn't like change. I love some of the underlying features of Office '07 and Windows 7 on paper, but I really had to force myself to try to use the new UIs without immediately tweaking the hell out of everything or reverting to an older version.
Please stop harassing Mr. Ballmer. He doesn't like it when people talk about his secret affair with FOSS.
Congrats. Your IP has now been logged. I would laugh if something came of this.
I'm so glad they got rid of the all the tiger that fouled up the place. It really brought down the whole place.
Bullet proof windows not as safe as previously thought. Under certain conditions, such as a door being unlocked and/or open, a bullet proof window may not keep you safe from robbery at gunpoint.
Them being too small of a fish makes it right to sue Google? I understand it makes sense from a business perspective, but is it really ethical?
I know a lot of people who "know a guy" when it comes to safety inspections. They're perfectly happy paying him $20 to slap a sticker on the car and call it a day.
What about all the nice bits of metal shavings in your oilpan?
What? You don't like wire fishing and getting covered in insulation? I thought EVERYBODY loved that. *itch*
I love when non-technical people attempt to regulate technology policies, especially when it's based on hearsay. Don't get me wrong, I've got plenty of issues with Windows Vista, but shouldn't the Texas IT department be handling these decisions? I realize that they may initiate the process, but what's the point of creating another hoop for them to jump through? I doubt the senate has any clue as to what goes on behind the scenes in their IT department's dealings with Windows.
In addition to the previously mentioned incidents, Conficker managed to take down icanhascheezburger.com via DDoS attack. Employee productivity quickly upshifted in many organizations, as they now had nothing to do but work.
I think this differs in the department of accountability. When one pirates music, he/she is solely responsible for his or her own actions, whereas the poster is dealing with piracy at work. He or she could be held accountable for the unlicensed installation of software in the duties of his job, which no employer should ask of an employee. (I do realize that he or she has not been asked to do so, I was simply making a point.)
Low-latency HD Video... read: Incredibly lossy/blocky upscaled pile of poop.
Unfortunately, I don't think I clarified what I meant by "crossing that bridge." The point I was trying to make was that from a user standpoint, it is unreasonable to stop using a piece of software solely because vulnerabilities may present themselves. I am not advocating that nothing be done to address the vulnerabilities before viruses are written, nor do I advocate doing nothing to protect yourself from said viruses.
As I cannot disagree with your point, I feel it merely comes down to a philosophical issue. Does one not cross the street for fear of being hit by a car?
Perhaps you should not constantly worry about viruses written for a piece of software very few people use and cross the bridge of dealing with such a virus when it happens.
There is way too much thought being put into this. Clearly the solution is to correct the earth's axis angle. Who needs seasons anyway?