>Unfortunately, the black hole of post-modern thought has (at least in the eyes of popular culture) thrown academia into obsolescence.
Agree. I'm a big defender of 'intellectual-ism' but there is allot of truth to this. Academia is indulging enough of that kind of noise that it leaves itself open to being easily discredited. And there are lots of people with their own narrow agenda that want it discredited.
Fortunately, all you have to do with watch CPAN's book TV to know there are very credible reasonable people of all political stripes rationally discussing all manner of issue. But the general public has lost all patience for such things.
>I'm not a doctor but I couldn't agree with this article more. >I grew up picking rock, bailing hay & working with animals. >Countless times I'd come home with dust, alfalfa or straw everywhere >(eyes, nose, clothes, etc). I worked with a lot of people and every
Yep, pretty much the same experience here. I grew up out-in-the-boonies and all through high school I never knew anyone with asthma, and no one ever complained about allergies, etc... We all thought people with such conditions were just wusses.
Then I went to college, and there I learned about allergies and asthma; and that they are actually serious things. I also shared my recollection of an asthama/allergy free youth with countless others.
If, God forbid, I ever have children I'm moving back out to the boonies and teaching them how to skin rabbits and muck out a barn.
There are lots of great places to work. In my experience most medium sized organizations are pretty well managed, and managed by competent people. But everywhere also has a crank or nut-job or two.
As an aside I've worked for people I thought were straight-up crooks, and I've worked for decent people who appreciate their employees. There is nothing that is worth working for crappy people, and even if decent people may pay less, it is worth it to have a decent work environment.
There are lots of well known reasons for this. Most notably the size of animals, especially insects, varies depending upon the amount of O2 in the atmosphere. The composition of the earth's atmosphere has varied significantly over time.
BTW, this is the real flaw with all time travel movies. If you bopped back to the age of the dinosours, you'd probably be dead within minutes as you might as well have jumped to a different planet. And dinosours's cloned back to like today would have to live in big bubbles with elevated oxygen levels [fire hazard!].
"Haven't you noticed? The computer industry likes to do this "reset" of software every 5-10 years. We get really far feature and stability wise with one platform and then BAM! Along comes a new environment and then we start the cycle of making new spreadsheets, word processors, etc."
Nah! This is totally bogus. UNIX is ancient, TCP/IP is nearly as old. They've ruled the realm of 'real computers' and 'real networks' forever; and they are only becoming more prevelant - not less.
The "reset" is only on cheap consumer-side junk. Today's PC with Windows is yesterdays Commodore 128.
Every hard-core researcher, student, and hacker I know uses a UNIX derivative (since Mac OS/X now counts).
>Replace "band" with "science major" and "football" >with "business major" or "PE major" and nearly >everything still holds at different levels. >American society not only holds thinkers and >researchers and scientists and engineers in less >admiration than celebrities and athletes and >managers, but it increasingly seems to be actively >punishing people in those fields.
Yep.
> Me, bitter? Nah!;-)
I'm right there with you (although our band sucked as bad as out football team). But I think you are really onto something. The values of American societry run completely counter to those required to compete in the 21st century. We don't elect intelligent people who propose large complicated solutions.... we elect a guy we would be comfortable 'having a beer with'.
And this is the same reason that no matter what politician does what our education system will continue its downward spiral. Because at our heart America doesn't give a rat's ass about education. Technology is 'for those wierdo's who never get laid'; sadly we even echo this non-stop in these forums (although it is complete and total crap). Somehow it passes for humour when the upshot is that we American's are screwing [no pun intended] ourselves.
> Thats what really gets me fired up about these > kind of statements. Its simple supply and demand.
In scenarios like this I don't think it is really "supply and demand". In the case of knowledge supply can often create demand. I suspect that the situation is much more complicated - do American IT staff expect to much money (spoiled by the 90's), are American IT people actually trained in the right things (IT or even CS is a pretty general and broad category), how does our CS/IT education compare to that of other countries?
>The basic gist of all the outsourcing hoopla in >the industry is "There is no demand for IT >workers."
I'm an IT worker, I know lots of IT workers. Many of us are turning down work because we just can't handle any more. Allot of this is unconventional; small companies, one time deals, etc...
>Modern coporations are cutting off their nose to >spite their face. Someday they will be crying in >their beer about not being able to find any >workers. Well they made their own bed now >they've got to sleep in it.
I'm an 'out there' liberal and more than happy to blame corporations for a laundry list of ills. But I just don't think the above is true. The US has failed - it has failed to control health care costs, it has failed to maintain a robust educational system, it has failed to provide basis services such as transportation (which raises the cost of living), and it has failed to convey to people the fact that there are a billion people 'over there' eager and willing to sacrifice to ge-what-we-got.
Of course corporations are going to say 'see ya' and go over there. That is kind of a 'Duh' decision.
The modern corporation isn't hurting itself at all because thanks to fiber optic cable it just doesn't matter where that research center is.
And a final point is that supply-and-demand works in reverse in some cases. To open a research center I need say 100 CS people, several electrical engineers, etc... Unless I can find ENOUGH of those, and good, ones I can't open that research center. So I go where there are 10,000 highly qualified people I can pick through to find just the ones I need. With the US producing more lawyers than engineers and scientists the fact that there are unemployeed engineers and scientists doesn't help - there are not enough unemployeed engineers and scientists.
> If you love computers, and have a reasonable > aptitude for programming, don't let the > "OUTSOURCING!!!" panic scare you away from the > field. The idea that software jobs are all going > to disappear is as foolish
Exactly. Hey people! - getting a degree isn't enough. You need to know you stuff, get some experience, etc... And try to spread out your skill set.
Part of the problem is that the value of American degrees are greatly diminished by the millification of our colleges.
We are currently shopping around for an ERP system - and WOW - are european software house help desk and programmers way more aggressive and 'on-the-ball' than the American equivalents.
Maybe these companies are out sourcing because not only are those developers and researchers cheaper - maybe they are also more aggressive and focussed (and less arrogant).
There is a huge difference between being an independent free-thinker and an asshole. But assholes find adopting the former title unto themselves useful for justifying their behaviour.
"Pure defeatism just isn't a productive attitude. Pessimists may have a more accurate estimation of their own abilities, but optimists are more likely to succeed. We need both."
Pure defeatism is not "Pessimism", and vice versa.
And optimists are more likely to succeed? Rubbish! Your probablility, if it can even be calculated, of success or failure in ANY endeavor is the same irrespective of any ideology you posess.
As an avvowed Pessimist I find this constant 'Optimists succeed more' drum-beat to be an opiate in itself. People who say this are making the assumption that a pessimist won't do something because they peceive the chance of success to be low or that a pessimist will give up sooner for the same reason. This simply isn't true. People very rarely make decisions based upon a real assesment of the probability of success. This only applies to the most basic decisions - I don't drive 250KPH on the freeway because odds are I'd get killed.
You choose to do something because you percieve the goal as good. You choose to fight for something or someone because you perceive it or them as possessing value. Someone who walks away from a 'good fight' [SLASHDOT CLUE="this is a metaphor for conflict, trial, or literal fight"] because they do not think they can win isn't an Optimist or a Pessimist - they are a coward. Cowards do not possess any philosophy or ideology beyond the short-term protection of their own skin, check book, etc...
I could make an argument (I usually don't because I think it isn't actually valid for the above reason) that a Pessimist is less likely to walk away from a situation. The pessimist knows the truth "You loose." Ultimately, sooner or later, old age, disease, a bullet - something will strip you of everything you love, that is assuming you are lucky enough to keep hold of those things until you die.
The best definition of Pessimism I've ever read - ""The thinker who sees man confronted by the infinite non-moral forces presumed by natural pantheism inevitably predominating over the finite powers of men may appear to the modern Christian theologian or to the evolutionist as a hopeless pessimist, and yet may himself have concluded that, though the future holds out no prospect save that of annihilation, man may yet by prudence and care enjoy a considerable measure of happiness. Pessimism, therefore, depends upon the individual point of view, and the term is frequently used merely in a condemnatory sense by hostile critics."
And I suspect most of those critics have questionable motives for espousing their 'Optimisitc' world views. The trumped up Optimism of Evangelicals, Free Marketeers, etc... are an excellent way to get lots of people to think, and more importantly act, as though everything is fine (in short - do nothing).
1.) Look for a job at a mid-sized, not huge company. They tend to offer better job security (fewer crazy political ripples); you're closer organizationally to upper management and you generally get to do a wider variety of tasks (since IT departments are smaller) which helps keep things interesting. 1.1.) The pay may not be as good, but if you have a decent repore with management then also "having a life" is easier. 1.1.1.) Have a life; find hobbies/activities you love, find a great woman, etc... Both for sanity sake and the fact that these things WILL make you better on the job as well (happy people are WAY more productive). 1.2.) Don't expect, or try to, jump to the top of the IT food-chain just because you have some scrap of paper (however valuable you think it may be). People beneath you will resent it, management will expect more (usually unreasonably), and you will be setup for high-stress at best, or worse - failure. 1.2.1.) Stress is a drag; the meat-sack you live in is only good for so long, don't waste that time sweating about silly crap like some companies accounts recievables workflow.
>I can't believe the number of posts on this site >talking about how "unprofessional" even an earring >on a male looks. Are we really still that wrapped >up in gender identity that even a gold stud on a >guy is a threat?
Threat? To what. Thats silly. It shows an unwillingless to conform to social norms that don't otherwise inhibit or oppress anyone. The last thing any *TEAM* needs is a belligerant non-conformist. Societies evolve social norms for very good reasons - to allow people to idenitify other people's bents.
Yes, it would certainly discourge me from hiring someone if THE LOOK LIKE A FREAK! Sorry if I don't want to stare at the chunk of metal hanging out of our face; niether does any client or user.
Tattooes are a little less offensive, although most look like something a sociopath would draw on the walls of his cell.
>All Mono applications would run in.NET, but not all.NET applications would run in Mono
Not true, I can write Mono application, using Mono extensions and P/Invokes not available on Windows or in.NET
>What would be Microsoft's reaction if Mono was 100% compiliant with all of.NET?
Who cares. And there are other implementations of.NET besides M$'s and Mono. It is too late in the game for them to get all grumbly, they've released the spec to ECMA and failed to excersise diligence in regard to the class definitions. This argument is spurious.
OpenGroupware does, and it all works now, and is GPL.
http://www.opengroupware.org
And connectors (working in CVS) are available for Kontact and Evolution. iCalendar clients like Sunbird are supported, and you have DAV access to project documents.
Outlook connectors, DAV access to project documents, iCalendar client supports. And beta but operational support in Evolution and Kontact (via GroupDAV).
>Open source hasn't yet succeeded in building a collaboration server that people can actually use in a variety of settings. We want to fill this gap with Hula.
I happen to disagree; the OpenGroupware.Org server works for us and lots of other people. Supported in Evolution, Kontact, and supports iCalendar clients like MozCal.
And they have a general purpose groupware protocol (GroupDAV), WebDAV access to project documents, and an XML-RPC API.
Is it possible for the monkeys on slashdot to discuss ANYTHING else other than some crazed notion why this or that technology is EVIL or philospohically inferior?!
Uhm, YOU'RE ALL NOT LAWYERS?!
Do you think places like Novell, IBM, and others (who have lots and lots of lawyers) would be using and developing Mono if there was this huge sword hanging over its neck? I mean, Duh!
You're asking THIS question HERE? Ha! Good luck, you'll get a recommendation for every fringe wierd distro out there.
Choose: SuSe, Fedora, or Debian. Whatever floats your boat. For a corporate environment where you need lots of fellow admin users and the ability to run proprietary software (Informix, DB2, Oracle, other such packages) these are your choices.
Do you really want advice from people who think compiling their own kernel actually buys them anything even remotely worth the time it took?
>It's still a rollup and/or a partial solution. >OGo doesn't even have an email system in it.
No it doesn't, it uses Cyrus, arguably the most scalable, stable, and feature rich mail server on the planet. And Cyrus ships with just about every current distribution. OGo even integrates with its filtering and vacation system (SIEVE). Tough to beat in my book. Why create YET-ANOTHER-MAIL-SERVER?
> The whole advantage to opengroupware is the web > client works and is in sync with your local client > (via ximian connector for evolution, or exchange > connector... or one of the many other things it > supports).
Not to mention robust Palm support, which is no small matter in a corporate environment.
>Opengroupware actually was a big hype, but they >failed to deliver what everyone was hoping for: a >complete open-source and free groupware server >and client, with all popular features such as >folder sharing, ACLs, free/busy, etc...
I don't quite understand, we are an OGo shop and OGo provides ALL the above -
1.Folder sharing
2.ACLs
3.Free/busy
>The problem with OpenGroupware, is that except >for the web interface, there is no client.
There is both WebDAV and XML-RPC integration capabilites - FAR beyond those offered by any other remotely "Open" collaberation package.
There is no single client, true. But nothing stop someone from building one.
>reliable in my testing. The web client, is not >very impressive either.
We find it to be excellent, and once your used to it, extemely productive and feature rich.
>The community around OpenGroupware seems rather >limited, I have the impression that all work is >still done by one developer of Skyrix.
This is simply NOT true. There is other developers doing PowerPC support, SyncML support, etc...
Slashdot Mirror
>Unfortunately, the black hole of post-modern thought has (at least in the eyes of popular culture) thrown academia into obsolescence.
Agree. I'm a big defender of 'intellectual-ism' but there is allot of truth to this. Academia is indulging enough of that kind of noise that it leaves itself open to being easily discredited. And there are lots of people with their own narrow agenda that want it discredited.
Fortunately, all you have to do with watch CPAN's book TV to know there are very credible reasonable people of all political stripes rationally discussing all manner of issue. But the general public has lost all patience for such things.
>I'm not a doctor but I couldn't agree with this article more.
>I grew up picking rock, bailing hay & working with animals.
>Countless times I'd come home with dust, alfalfa or straw everywhere
>(eyes, nose, clothes, etc). I worked with a lot of people and every
Yep, pretty much the same experience here. I grew up out-in-the-boonies and all through high school I never knew anyone with asthma, and no one ever complained about allergies, etc... We all thought people with such conditions were just wusses.
Then I went to college, and there I learned about allergies and asthma; and that they are actually serious things. I also shared my recollection of an asthama/allergy free youth with countless others.
If, God forbid, I ever have children I'm moving back out to the boonies and teaching them how to skin rabbits and muck out a barn.
There are lots of great places to work. In my experience most medium sized organizations are pretty well managed, and managed by competent people. But everywhere also has a crank or nut-job or two.
As an aside I've worked for people I thought were straight-up crooks, and I've worked for decent people who appreciate their employees. There is nothing that is worth working for crappy people, and even if decent people may pay less, it is worth it to have a decent work environment.
There are lots of well known reasons for this. Most notably the size of animals, especially insects, varies depending upon the amount of O2 in the atmosphere. The composition of the earth's atmosphere has varied significantly over time.
BTW, this is the real flaw with all time travel movies. If you bopped back to the age of the dinosours, you'd probably be dead within minutes as you might as well have jumped to a different planet. And dinosours's cloned back to like today would have to live in big bubbles with elevated oxygen levels [fire hazard!].
"Haven't you noticed? The computer industry likes to do this "reset" of software every 5-10 years. We get really far feature and stability wise with one platform and then BAM! Along comes a new environment and then we start the cycle of making new spreadsheets, word processors, etc."
Nah! This is totally bogus. UNIX is ancient, TCP/IP is nearly as old. They've ruled the realm of 'real computers' and 'real networks' forever; and they are only becoming more prevelant - not less.
The "reset" is only on cheap consumer-side junk. Today's PC with Windows is yesterdays Commodore 128.
Every hard-core researcher, student, and hacker I know uses a UNIX derivative (since Mac OS/X now counts).
>Replace "band" with "science major" and "football"
;-)
>with "business major" or "PE major" and nearly
>everything still holds at different levels.
>American society not only holds thinkers and
>researchers and scientists and engineers in less
>admiration than celebrities and athletes and
>managers, but it increasingly seems to be actively
>punishing people in those fields.
Yep.
> Me, bitter? Nah!
I'm right there with you (although our band sucked as bad as out football team). But I think you are really onto something. The values of American societry run completely counter to those required to compete in the 21st century. We don't elect intelligent people who propose large complicated solutions.... we elect a guy we would be comfortable 'having a beer with'.
And this is the same reason that no matter what politician does what our education system will continue its downward spiral. Because at our heart America doesn't give a rat's ass about education. Technology is 'for those wierdo's who never get laid'; sadly we even echo this non-stop in these forums (although it is complete and total crap). Somehow it passes for humour when the upshot is that we American's are screwing [no pun intended] ourselves.
> Thats what really gets me fired up about these
> kind of statements. Its simple supply and demand.
In scenarios like this I don't think it is really "supply and demand". In the case of knowledge supply can often create demand. I suspect that the situation is much more complicated - do American IT staff expect to much money (spoiled by the 90's), are American IT people actually trained in the right things (IT or even CS is a pretty general and broad category), how does our CS/IT education compare to that of other countries?
>The basic gist of all the outsourcing hoopla in
>the industry is "There is no demand for IT
>workers."
I'm an IT worker, I know lots of IT workers. Many of us are turning down work because we just can't handle any more. Allot of this is unconventional; small companies, one time deals, etc...
>Modern coporations are cutting off their nose to
>spite their face. Someday they will be crying in
>their beer about not being able to find any
>workers. Well they made their own bed now
>they've got to sleep in it.
I'm an 'out there' liberal and more than happy to blame corporations for a laundry list of ills. But I just don't think the above is true. The US has failed - it has failed to control health care costs, it has failed to maintain a robust educational system, it has failed to provide basis services such as transportation (which raises the cost of living), and it has failed to convey to people the fact that there are a billion people 'over there' eager and willing to sacrifice to ge-what-we-got.
Of course corporations are going to say 'see ya' and go over there. That is kind of a 'Duh' decision.
The modern corporation isn't hurting itself at all because thanks to fiber optic cable it just doesn't matter where that research center is.
And a final point is that supply-and-demand works in reverse in some cases. To open a research center I need say 100 CS people, several electrical engineers, etc... Unless I can find ENOUGH of those, and good, ones I can't open that research center. So I go where there are 10,000 highly qualified people I can pick through to find just the ones I need. With the US producing more lawyers than engineers and scientists the fact that there are unemployeed engineers and scientists doesn't help - there are not enough unemployeed engineers and scientists.
> If you love computers, and have a reasonable
> aptitude for programming, don't let the
> "OUTSOURCING!!!" panic scare you away from the
> field. The idea that software jobs are all going
> to disappear is as foolish
Exactly. Hey people! - getting a degree isn't enough. You need to know you stuff, get some experience, etc... And try to spread out your skill set.
Part of the problem is that the value of American degrees are greatly diminished by the millification of our colleges.
We are currently shopping around for an ERP system - and WOW - are european software house help desk and programmers way more aggressive and 'on-the-ball' than the American equivalents.
Maybe these companies are out sourcing because not only are those developers and researchers cheaper - maybe they are also more aggressive and focussed (and less arrogant).
Amen!
There is a huge difference between being an independent free-thinker and an asshole. But assholes find adopting the former title unto themselves useful for justifying their behaviour.
"Pure defeatism just isn't a productive attitude. Pessimists may have a more accurate estimation of their own abilities, but optimists are more likely to succeed. We need both."
Pure defeatism is not "Pessimism", and vice versa.
And optimists are more likely to succeed? Rubbish! Your probablility, if it can even be calculated, of success or failure in ANY endeavor is the same irrespective of any ideology you posess.
As an avvowed Pessimist I find this constant 'Optimists succeed more' drum-beat to be an opiate in itself. People who say this are making the assumption that a pessimist won't do something because they peceive the chance of success to be low or that a pessimist will give up sooner for the same reason. This simply isn't true. People very rarely make decisions based upon a real assesment of the probability of success. This only applies to the most basic decisions - I don't drive 250KPH on the freeway because odds are I'd get killed.
You choose to do something because you percieve the goal as good. You choose to fight for something or someone because you perceive it or them as possessing value. Someone who walks away from a 'good fight' [SLASHDOT CLUE="this is a metaphor for conflict, trial, or literal fight"] because they do not think they can win isn't an Optimist or a Pessimist - they are a coward. Cowards do not possess any philosophy or ideology beyond the short-term protection of their own skin, check book, etc...
I could make an argument (I usually don't because I think it isn't actually valid for the above reason) that a Pessimist is less likely to walk away from a situation. The pessimist knows the truth "You loose." Ultimately, sooner or later, old age, disease, a bullet - something will strip you of everything you love, that is assuming you are lucky enough to keep hold of those things until you die.
The best definition of Pessimism I've ever read - ""The thinker who sees man confronted by the infinite non-moral forces presumed by natural pantheism inevitably predominating over the finite powers of men may appear to the modern Christian theologian or to the evolutionist as a hopeless pessimist, and yet may himself have concluded that, though the future holds out no prospect save that of annihilation, man may yet by prudence and care enjoy a considerable measure of happiness. Pessimism, therefore, depends upon the individual point of view, and the term is frequently used merely in a condemnatory sense by hostile critics."
And I suspect most of those critics have questionable motives for espousing their 'Optimisitc' world views. The trumped up Optimism of Evangelicals, Free Marketeers, etc... are an excellent way to get lots of people to think, and more importantly act, as though everything is fine (in short - do nothing).
1.) Look for a job at a mid-sized, not huge company. They tend to offer better job security (fewer crazy political ripples); you're closer organizationally to upper management and you generally get to do a wider variety of tasks (since IT departments are smaller) which helps keep things interesting.
1.1.) The pay may not be as good, but if you have a decent repore with management then also "having a life" is easier.
1.1.1.) Have a life; find hobbies/activities you love, find a great woman, etc... Both for sanity sake and the fact that these things WILL make you better on the job as well (happy people are WAY more productive).
1.2.) Don't expect, or try to, jump to the top of the IT food-chain just because you have some scrap of paper (however valuable you think it may be). People beneath you will resent it, management will expect more (usually unreasonably), and you will be setup for high-stress at best, or worse - failure.
1.2.1.) Stress is a drag; the meat-sack you live in is only good for so long, don't waste that time sweating about silly crap like some companies accounts recievables workflow.
>I can't believe the number of posts on this site
>talking about how "unprofessional" even an earring
>on a male looks. Are we really still that wrapped
>up in gender identity that even a gold stud on a
>guy is a threat?
Threat? To what. Thats silly. It shows an unwillingless to conform to social norms that don't otherwise inhibit or oppress anyone. The last thing any *TEAM* needs is a belligerant non-conformist. Societies evolve social norms for very good reasons - to allow people to idenitify other people's bents.
Yes, it would certainly discourge me from hiring someone if THE LOOK LIKE A FREAK! Sorry if I don't want to stare at the chunk of metal hanging out of our face; niether does any client or user.
Tattooes are a little less offensive, although most look like something a sociopath would draw on the walls of his cell.
Dude! I am the author of GroupDAV.NET!!! Wow, how cools is that! GroupDAV.NET is a .NET assembly (developed in Mono) for utilizing a GroupDAV resource.
>All Mono applications would run in .NET, but not all .NET applications would run in Mono
.NET
.NET?
.NET besides M$'s and Mono. It is too late in the game for them to get all grumbly, they've released the spec to ECMA and failed to excersise diligence in regard to the class definitions. This argument is spurious.
Not true, I can write Mono application, using Mono extensions and P/Invokes not available on Windows or in
>What would be Microsoft's reaction if Mono was 100% compiliant with all of
Who cares. And there are other implementations of
OpenGroupware does, and it all works now, and is GPL.
http://www.opengroupware.org
And connectors (working in CVS) are available for Kontact and Evolution. iCalendar clients like Sunbird are supported, and you have DAV access to project documents.
>We need an open source calender server.
http://www.opengroupware.org
Outlook connectors, DAV access to project documents, iCalendar client supports. And beta but operational support in Evolution and Kontact (via GroupDAV).
>Open source hasn't yet succeeded in building a
collaboration server that people can actually use in a variety of settings. We want to fill this gap with Hula.
I happen to disagree; the OpenGroupware.Org server works for us and lots of other people. Supported in Evolution, Kontact, and supports iCalendar clients like MozCal.
And they have a general purpose groupware protocol (GroupDAV), WebDAV access to project documents, and an XML-RPC API.
`mono program.exe' runs your program, no need to
pass a class name, or a path or setup the cp to
run.
Amen!
This is wonderful stuff; Java may be great, but it is really hard to use and has grown into a labyrinthian monster rivalling even CPAN.
Is it possible for the monkeys on slashdot to discuss ANYTHING else other than some crazed notion why this or that technology is EVIL or philospohically inferior?!
Uhm, YOU'RE ALL NOT LAWYERS?!
Do you think places like Novell, IBM, and others (who have lots and lots of lawyers) would be using and developing Mono if there was this huge sword hanging over its neck? I mean, Duh!
People... Get A Grip!
>All .NET is is a Windows development platform
.NET apps on Linux right now.
Uhm, aren't we talking about Mono?
Sorry, but you're very wrong. I'm running
You're asking THIS question HERE? Ha! Good luck, you'll get a recommendation for every fringe wierd distro out there.
Choose: SuSe, Fedora, or Debian. Whatever floats your boat. For a corporate environment where you need lots of fellow admin users and the ability to run proprietary software (Informix, DB2, Oracle, other such packages) these are your choices.
Do you really want advice from people who think compiling their own kernel actually buys them anything even remotely worth the time it took?
>It's still a rollup and/or a partial solution.
>OGo doesn't even have an email system in it.
No it doesn't, it uses Cyrus, arguably the most scalable, stable, and feature rich mail server on the planet. And Cyrus ships with just about every current distribution. OGo even integrates with its filtering and vacation system (SIEVE). Tough to beat in my book. Why create YET-ANOTHER-MAIL-SERVER?
> The whole advantage to opengroupware is the web
> client works and is in sync with your local client
> (via ximian connector for evolution, or exchange
> connector... or one of the many other things it
> supports).
Not to mention robust Palm support, which is no small matter in a corporate environment.
>Opengroupware actually was a big hype, but they
>failed to deliver what everyone was hoping for: a
>complete open-source and free groupware server
>and client, with all popular features such as
>folder sharing, ACLs, free/busy, etc...
I don't quite understand, we are an OGo shop and OGo provides ALL the above -
1.Folder sharing
2.ACLs
3.Free/busy
>The problem with OpenGroupware, is that except
>for the web interface, there is no client.
There is both WebDAV and XML-RPC integration capabilites - FAR beyond those offered by any other remotely "Open" collaberation package.
There is no single client, true. But nothing stop someone from building one.
>reliable in my testing. The web client, is not
>very impressive either.
We find it to be excellent, and once your used to it, extemely productive and feature rich.
>The community around OpenGroupware seems rather
>limited, I have the impression that all work is
>still done by one developer of Skyrix.
This is simply NOT true. There is other developers doing PowerPC support, SyncML support, etc...