"Sierras" is not a word - at best, it's Englishified Spanish, often used by those who don't understand what they're talking about.
TFA refers to a range of mountains on Titan. The correct usage would be Sierra, the term for a range of mountains in Spanish.
As a photographer and snow sports person, this is a just a simple pet peeve, but the usage is exanding, and for those who know what Sierra means, "Sierras" grates on the ears. Sierra is already plural in Spanish - no need to add an s.
As these products have matured, they have become more seamless and work better with other technologies.
Fantastic! We'll just sit tight while you get your act together.
As software companies go, there are many examples you could look to for better ideas about how to develop architectures across different fuctional groups that integrate well through all parts of the product lifecycle. Post 1999 Apple, is a good example - they seem to have no trouble supporting new OS featres within applications and vice-versa on a yearly basis.
Sorry if this seems trollish, but you seem very willing to make excuses for what is an admittedly inefficient management and development structure that leads to inferior products that are only accepted by the marketplace because of previous entrenchment. Bad products on the backs of good produucts, in other words. Is this the reputation you'd like associated with your resume?
Maintaining legacy support it very difficult from version to version, and this is such a low priority I can't see anything being done in the future.
Written like a true corporate I.T. coward with little understanding of the big picture and less understanding of what his customers (the users) actually need to accomplish their jobs
See my post above for why this is a big deal. Dropping support for this feature is just one more step on a long march to kill off anything that's not a secretary's tool for Windows in the corporate space.
When the file hits 70megs it starts to hit a crawl.
This is a big problem for the few long document writers who use Macs. Long Word documents on the Mac take forever to open - tables render slowly, repagination consumes 180% of my CPU, and making changes at the end of a complex 400-page document is an exercise in frustration on a 4.5GB RAM/Dual 2.5GHz G5 - twenty seconds from "Save" to response.
Once, Framemaker on Macs and Solaris machines were what Technical Writers used - period. Over the years, the lowest-common-denominator mentality of corporate purchasing has taken over - and Adobe has handed Microsoft a huge gift by killing the Mac version of FrameMaker, forcing Mac writers to use Word.
The end result has been that most new companies - those without established Tech Pubs departments - use Word for everything. It's been my experience that the younger the Tech Pubs manager is, the less inclined they are to use FrameMaker - because it's "teh hard". Unfortunately for tech writers and their audiences, Frame still is the most complete and usable tool for long documents - but it's on the way out.
Now, documents from HR manuals to API references to microprocessor manuals are written in Word, which has barfed up anything over about forty ages for over a decade now. Seriously - Microsoft has never fixed the corrupted save and document recovery bugs that 95% of users never experience - because you'll only see the problem when you create long, complex documents.
When working on a recent assignment for a Group that shall remain nameless, I spent most of my time trying to work around Word's limitations. I asked the SME about the source material - did he have problems like mine when using Word on his company-issued top-flight PC? "Yes." Would they consider using Framemaker for their next document? "I don't have time to learn a new program" said the scientist.
Keep in mind, I spent ten of sixty billable hours just trying to get Word to process words. Ostensibly, this is what it's designed to do, but this decade-plus-old program still cannot handle long documents with lots of graphics. Microsoft was busy doing other things, like churning out ten versions of DirectX and the Zune - other products that extend and extinguish.
I'm not asking for a lot. We're talking about a 400-page document with lots of tables, few graphics, and fewer than twenty styles. This would be among the medium-sized documents that FrameMaker could open in 1-2 seconds. In Word, on a Dual G5, it takes over four minutes to completely open the document, because Word insists on repaginating every time you look askance. then, after about ten-fifteen Saves, Word barfs. Sometimes, the only way you can get the document back is to open the.odc, immediately Copy the contents, and paste it into a new document - which fixes the crashing problem for another 10-15 saves.
This isn't a document-specific or release-specific problem. I've wasted time on this with several recent versions of Word - on the Mac and PC - and with several similar documents. The problem will likely never be fixed. And because of Adobe's shortsightedness and Microsoft's LCD mentality, the only real alternative is LaTex - a very complex solution to what should be an easy problem. Frame was the ideal, but Adobe dutifully did the most stupid thing possible and killed it on the Mac. I wouldn't mind using Frame on the PC, but as I said above, most of the assignments I take on as a contract technical writer come to me in Word.
Tying this into the VBA-less Mac version of Office, it's clear that Microsoft IS trying to force the professionals who insist on using Macs off the platform. Just as they've convinced the memo-writers in corporate IT that Word on any platform is perfectly suitable for the Tech Pubs department, they slowly reduce the options available to users, costing companies time and money that goes unnoticed and untabulated in the TCO equation.
Office for Mac development costs them next to nothing,
If anything, a psychological profile would be the proper approach.
And with a failure rate of about 20% (according to my headhunter) these personality tests keep a lot of good people out of jobs.
But I suppose we're all supposed to prostrate in front of the almighty corporation. God forbid companies take risks or put in place mitigation strategies so that rogue employees can't bring the whole place down.
Did they make Ken Lay take a personality test? What about Jeff Skilling? I suspect they would have been found ideal based on the types of questions on these tests - which tend to focus on attention to detail, attitude, and trust in coworkers. Yet these men ruined the livelihoods of thousands with their greed. But personality tests don't probe for greed or concern for others (at least not the ones I've taken). They're also pretty invasive, asking about a prospective employee's personal life.
The personality test I took was at a company in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. My friends back in Silicon Valley couldn't believe some of the questions that were on the test, and would "just have walked out". But I need a job, so I took the test. It said I wasn't gregarious enough and a something of a solitary worker. So despite a director-level assurance that they wanted to hire me, the personality test made the hiring decision for them.
Personality tests are measurements based on what companies think they want to know - and this isn't truly useful information. A "loner" might be able to accomplish more, faster, than folks who are sociable and who hang out at the coffee pot for several minutes a day, but according to the Caliper test, these people aren't good fits at most companies.
I think that based on these simple observations, personality tests (and by extension, background checks) are less useful than they're billed as being.
The location of the device is triangulated based on it's relation to nearby cells. That's how most cell phones can be located by law enforcement. Not nearly as precise as GPS.
My cell phone and my laptop broadcast where I am and who I am all day long; what difference does it make if my shoes do the same thing?
Agreed.
Much ado about barely anything. I met the product manager for the Nike+iPod kits. I can assure you that tracking people without their permission wasn't in the MRD.
So, based on the FA, you have to be within 30 feet of the person the "bug" is planted on. How is this so effing different than following someone around and watching what they do?
I'm a pretty big privacy advocate. I got ticked when the company who "wanted to hire me" made me take an invasive personality test But this is a lot of heat and noise over nothing - an attention-seeking hyper concernicus group looking for attention.
I'm from Louisiana. After moving here seveal months ago to attend to a family emergency, I've grown used to the state's warped-ness.
I'm sorry. Never move here thiking you'll take a tech job. Never think that anything but either a mall job, an MCSE grunt, or a longshoreman's work awaits you.
This state is hell. And it's the future of the nation if the last two presidential elections are any indication - declining public education, declining corporate interest, and declining intelligence.
It might be the sportsman's paradise, but it sure is a geek's hell.
Next year, when you upgrade to an iPod Pico (or whatever) that music you "bought" for your first iPod won't play, because you've used up all its licenses.
Idiotic moron.
You can reset all five licenses as oten as once a year. The iPods don't count as authorized machines - only PC/Macs with iTunes.
Stop talking about this already - it's obvious you are spouting about shit you know nothing about!
Point me to a version of iTunes without DRM from Apple please.
Uh...all of them?
The iTunes Music Store and files downloaded from the same are the only component of Apple's digital music strategy that have any DRM.
iTunes does not apply DRM to files, but allows iTMS files to be played. iTunes also plays almost any non-DRM format conceivable.
iPods do not apply DRM to files, but allow DRM'd Audible and iTMS files to be played. iPods also play many (.mp3, AIFF, AAC) non-DRM format sound files.
People are obviously stupid enough to buy iPods that are crippled by FairPlay
This statement (if you really believe it and aren't just spreading FUD) is enough for me to discount the entirety of your post.
The iPod doesn't require FairPlay or iTMS files to play. It plays.mp3 as well as AAC, AIFF, etc. There is nothing inherent in the iPod that requires DRM or DRM files of any sort.
If you really think otherwise, please return your "geek" credentials at the door. You know next to nothing about how the leading music players works.
Bono's not a sociologist. What's your point? Angelina Jolie isn't a social worker. What's your point?
How many scientists working on issues of critical importance are household names? And how much weight does a well-known name give to scientific or social crises?
While every politician has his shortcomings Gore's interest in and message about global worming is not a political one - though it does have repercussions in the political arena.
I fuckin' hate when people use Gore's political career as a cloak to cast doubt on the facts about global warming - it shows how well the right wing noise machine in this country has done at convincing otherwise intelligent people to disbelieve experts and those who speak for experts about real facts.
The purpose of the review is not to give geeks a rundown of every single feature and whether it performs as expected. The purpose is to inform the reader about whether this is even a worthwhile product, given all the hype that surrounds it.
Speaking of which, I'm still appalled at the number of "geeks" on Slashdot who:
-Still think the iPod DRMs everything. -Conveniently forget about the fact that Microsoft has promised to DRM everything. -Have little, if no idea about the particular features of the most popular mp3 players.
Every iPod thread I read, someone posts about the "iPod's DRM" - which is actually iTunes Music Store DRM. Every time I read an article about the Zune (which always mention the iPod), the flocks of people who have been waiting for something which will make their irrational Apple hatred seem warranted flock in to trumpet the Zune, despite the fact that this is the only player that applies DRM to your files without your permission.
If we're all so up in arms about DRM, let's put our Apple/Microsoft biases aside and look at which manufacturer treats users with more respect. Does respect come from a manufacturer whose player can apply DRM to your files and whose profit margins include payments to music companies whose products you may never have purchased and may never be interested in?
In what sense do Apple-machines fuse form with function? All they did were pack up low-quality components in a expensive box; the form has nothing to do with the function in this case.
Maybe the best example now is the new Mac Pro - which has specs comparable to this machine, but manages to come off looking, sounding, and performing even better. Oh - and it's cheaper, too.
I wonder if you'd have signed your post if you weren't just trolling?
Yes, you are locked in. I've never found a way to legally play my legally-purchased iTunes music on my main OS, Ubuntu.
-How did you buy your music? -Does Apple claim that iTunes music is supported on Ubuntu? -Why did you choose a music format that is incompatible with your main OS? iTunes don't play on Solaris either, but you don't see sysadmins rising up against Apple's failure to support one of the leading server OSs out there...
Face it - your're looking for a reason to complain, have access to a system that supports iTunes, but still choose to run an OS that doesn't work with iTunes.
Why don't you just channel your energy into getting Apple to support Ubuntu with iTunes or dual-boot?
Jobs is someone who had actually had relationships with members of the opposite sex, he didn't have to jump some company goldigging bimbo and briber her with $billion to have sex.
Sounds like you might have worked at Apple in the early 1980s.
What I find mildly amusing on Slashdot are all these young and idealistic IT "professionals"
Thanks for assuming who I am...but did you notice your UID is over 850k after mine?
I've been in the industry (and reading Slashdot) a hell of a lot longer than you, fella.
So current DRM schemes run into some issues with Vista. Big deal.
So tell me - at what point does it get to be too much fucking trouble - and how much money will that strategy ultimately make for the studios?
The **AA thinks that DRM will save them - and it could, if handled right - but Microsoft's vision is one of superrestrictions and flashy Zune-ish crap.
Given how buggy and restrictive Microsoft's software is for the money, you think the consumer is going to buy into that vision and experience over the long term (10-20 years)?
Slashdot Mirror
"Sierras" is not a word - at best, it's Englishified Spanish, often used by those who don't understand what they're talking about.
TFA refers to a range of mountains on Titan. The correct usage would be Sierra, the term for a range of mountains in Spanish.
As a photographer and snow sports person, this is a just a simple pet peeve, but the usage is exanding, and for those who know what Sierra means, "Sierras" grates on the ears. Sierra is already plural in Spanish - no need to add an s.
when we all know idiotarians prefer that we all work for nothing and make no money and live in grass huts
Ah, another Little Green Footballer shows his cowardice by posting anonymously.
Signed up for the Iraq war yet? How's Charles Johnson? Go to any hangings lately?
As these products have matured, they have become more seamless and work better with other technologies.
Fantastic! We'll just sit tight while you get your act together.
As software companies go, there are many examples you could look to for better ideas about how to develop architectures across different fuctional groups that integrate well through all parts of the product lifecycle. Post 1999 Apple, is a good example - they seem to have no trouble supporting new OS featres within applications and vice-versa on a yearly basis.
Sorry if this seems trollish, but you seem very willing to make excuses for what is an admittedly inefficient management and development structure that leads to inferior products that are only accepted by the marketplace because of previous entrenchment. Bad products on the backs of good produucts, in other words. Is this the reputation you'd like associated with your resume?
the Vista disaster causes a shareholder revolt, removing their top six levels of deadwood.
Given what AAPL has done over the past few years versus the performance of MSFT, I'm surprised there hasn't been a revolt over Vista already.
Vista will underperform. Zune already underperforms. XBox 360 still loses money on every unit sold. What's wrong with Microsoft?
read the caps in Little Richard's voice
Sorry, I've never been ass-fucked before, so I can't do the Little Richard voice.
Outlook-equivalent (except it's not)
Sorry, I meant that Entourage was meant to be an Outlook equivalent, but it isn't. It is, however, bundled with Office.
Maintaining legacy support it very difficult from version to version, and this is such a low priority I can't see anything being done in the future.
Written like a true corporate I.T. coward with little understanding of the big picture and less understanding of what his customers (the users) actually need to accomplish their jobs
See my post above for why this is a big deal. Dropping support for this feature is just one more step on a long march to kill off anything that's not a secretary's tool for Windows in the corporate space.
When the file hits 70megs it starts to hit a crawl.
.odc, immediately Copy the contents, and paste it into a new document - which fixes the crashing problem for another 10-15 saves.
This is a big problem for the few long document writers who use Macs. Long Word documents on the Mac take forever to open - tables render slowly, repagination consumes 180% of my CPU, and making changes at the end of a complex 400-page document is an exercise in frustration on a 4.5GB RAM/Dual 2.5GHz G5 - twenty seconds from "Save" to response.
Once, Framemaker on Macs and Solaris machines were what Technical Writers used - period. Over the years, the lowest-common-denominator mentality of corporate purchasing has taken over - and Adobe has handed Microsoft a huge gift by killing the Mac version of FrameMaker, forcing Mac writers to use Word.
The end result has been that most new companies - those without established Tech Pubs departments - use Word for everything. It's been my experience that the younger the Tech Pubs manager is, the less inclined they are to use FrameMaker - because it's "teh hard". Unfortunately for tech writers and their audiences, Frame still is the most complete and usable tool for long documents - but it's on the way out.
Now, documents from HR manuals to API references to microprocessor manuals are written in Word, which has barfed up anything over about forty ages for over a decade now. Seriously - Microsoft has never fixed the corrupted save and document recovery bugs that 95% of users never experience - because you'll only see the problem when you create long, complex documents.
When working on a recent assignment for a Group that shall remain nameless, I spent most of my time trying to work around Word's limitations. I asked the SME about the source material - did he have problems like mine when using Word on his company-issued top-flight PC? "Yes." Would they consider using Framemaker for their next document? "I don't have time to learn a new program" said the scientist.
Keep in mind, I spent ten of sixty billable hours just trying to get Word to process words. Ostensibly, this is what it's designed to do, but this decade-plus-old program still cannot handle long documents with lots of graphics. Microsoft was busy doing other things, like churning out ten versions of DirectX and the Zune - other products that extend and extinguish.
I'm not asking for a lot. We're talking about a 400-page document with lots of tables, few graphics, and fewer than twenty styles. This would be among the medium-sized documents that FrameMaker could open in 1-2 seconds. In Word, on a Dual G5, it takes over four minutes to completely open the document, because Word insists on repaginating every time you look askance. then, after about ten-fifteen Saves, Word barfs. Sometimes, the only way you can get the document back is to open the
This isn't a document-specific or release-specific problem. I've wasted time on this with several recent versions of Word - on the Mac and PC - and with several similar documents. The problem will likely never be fixed. And because of Adobe's shortsightedness and Microsoft's LCD mentality, the only real alternative is LaTex - a very complex solution to what should be an easy problem. Frame was the ideal, but Adobe dutifully did the most stupid thing possible and killed it on the Mac. I wouldn't mind using Frame on the PC, but as I said above, most of the assignments I take on as a contract technical writer come to me in Word.
Tying this into the VBA-less Mac version of Office, it's clear that Microsoft IS trying to force the professionals who insist on using Macs off the platform. Just as they've convinced the memo-writers in corporate IT that Word on any platform is perfectly suitable for the Tech Pubs department, they slowly reduce the options available to users, costing companies time and money that goes unnoticed and untabulated in the TCO equation.
Office for Mac development costs them next to nothing,
What does your comment have to do with the Mac version of Microsoft Office? Just wondering.
Entourage is the Outlook-equivalent (except it's not) bundled with Mac Office.
If anything, a psychological profile would be the proper approach.
And with a failure rate of about 20% (according to my headhunter) these personality tests keep a lot of good people out of jobs.
But I suppose we're all supposed to prostrate in front of the almighty corporation. God forbid companies take risks or put in place mitigation strategies so that rogue employees can't bring the whole place down.
Did they make Ken Lay take a personality test? What about Jeff Skilling? I suspect they would have been found ideal based on the types of questions on these tests - which tend to focus on attention to detail, attitude, and trust in coworkers. Yet these men ruined the livelihoods of thousands with their greed. But personality tests don't probe for greed or concern for others (at least not the ones I've taken). They're also pretty invasive, asking about a prospective employee's personal life.
The personality test I took was at a company in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. My friends back in Silicon Valley couldn't believe some of the questions that were on the test, and would "just have walked out". But I need a job, so I took the test. It said I wasn't gregarious enough and a something of a solitary worker. So despite a director-level assurance that they wanted to hire me, the personality test made the hiring decision for them.
Personality tests are measurements based on what companies think they want to know - and this isn't truly useful information. A "loner" might be able to accomplish more, faster, than folks who are sociable and who hang out at the coffee pot for several minutes a day, but according to the Caliper test, these people aren't good fits at most companies.
I think that based on these simple observations, personality tests (and by extension, background checks) are less useful than they're billed as being.
The location of the device is triangulated based on it's relation to nearby cells. That's how most cell phones can be located by law enforcement. Not nearly as precise as GPS.
My cell phone and my laptop broadcast where I am and who I am all day long; what difference does it make if my shoes do the same thing?
Agreed.
Much ado about barely anything. I met the product manager for the Nike+iPod kits. I can assure you that tracking people without their permission wasn't in the MRD.
So, based on the FA, you have to be within 30 feet of the person the "bug" is planted on. How is this so effing different than following someone around and watching what they do?
I'm a pretty big privacy advocate. I got ticked when the company who "wanted to hire me" made me take an invasive personality test But this is a lot of heat and noise over nothing - an attention-seeking hyper concernicus group looking for attention.
The best thing about the Newton was Steve Jobs' press conference claiming that there was a "2.5 trillion dollar market" for it
That's very interesting, as Steve Jobs wasn't at the company when Newton was conceived, and killed the division upon returning to Apple in 1997.
And now MADD wants breathinterlock on every car.
Enjoy the pain, America.
I'm from Louisiana. After moving here seveal months ago to attend to a family emergency, I've grown used to the state's warped-ness.
I'm sorry. Never move here thiking you'll take a tech job. Never think that anything but either a mall job, an MCSE grunt, or a longshoreman's work awaits you.
This state is hell. And it's the future of the nation if the last two presidential elections are any indication - declining public education, declining corporate interest, and declining intelligence.
It might be the sportsman's paradise, but it sure is a geek's hell.
Next year, when you upgrade to an iPod Pico (or whatever) that music you "bought" for your first iPod won't play, because you've used up all its licenses.
Idiotic moron.
You can reset all five licenses as oten as once a year. The iPods don't count as authorized machines - only PC/Macs with iTunes.
Stop talking about this already - it's obvious you are spouting about shit you know nothing about!
Point me to a version of iTunes without DRM from Apple please.
Uh...all of them?
The iTunes Music Store and files downloaded from the same are the only component of Apple's digital music strategy that have any DRM.
iTunes does not apply DRM to files, but allows iTMS files to be played. iTunes also plays almost any non-DRM format conceivable.
iPods do not apply DRM to files, but allow DRM'd Audible and iTMS files to be played. iPods also play many (.mp3, AIFF, AAC) non-DRM format sound files.
Stop spreading FUD about the iPod.
People are obviously stupid enough to buy iPods that are crippled by FairPlay
.mp3 as well as AAC, AIFF, etc. There is nothing inherent in the iPod that requires DRM or DRM files of any sort.
This statement (if you really believe it and aren't just spreading FUD) is enough for me to discount the entirety of your post.
The iPod doesn't require FairPlay or iTMS files to play. It plays
If you really think otherwise, please return your "geek" credentials at the door. You know next to nothing about how the leading music players works.
Microsoft calls it "Soviet Brown"
In Soviet Russia, Brown calls Microsoft!
And what scientific field is Al Gore in again?
Bono's not a sociologist. What's your point? Angelina Jolie isn't a social worker. What's your point?
How many scientists working on issues of critical importance are household names? And how much weight does a well-known name give to scientific or social crises?
While every politician has his shortcomings Gore's interest in and message about global worming is not a political one - though it does have repercussions in the political arena.
I fuckin' hate when people use Gore's political career as a cloak to cast doubt on the facts about global warming - it shows how well the right wing noise machine in this country has done at convincing otherwise intelligent people to disbelieve experts and those who speak for experts about real facts.
The purpose of the review is not to give geeks a rundown of every single feature and whether it performs as expected. The purpose is to inform the reader about whether this is even a worthwhile product, given all the hype that surrounds it.
Speaking of which, I'm still appalled at the number of "geeks" on Slashdot who:
-Still think the iPod DRMs everything.
-Conveniently forget about the fact that Microsoft has promised to DRM everything.
-Have little, if no idea about the particular features of the most popular mp3 players.
Every iPod thread I read, someone posts about the "iPod's DRM" - which is actually iTunes Music Store DRM. Every time I read an article about the Zune (which always mention the iPod), the flocks of people who have been waiting for something which will make their irrational Apple hatred seem warranted flock in to trumpet the Zune, despite the fact that this is the only player that applies DRM to your files without your permission.
If we're all so up in arms about DRM, let's put our Apple/Microsoft biases aside and look at which manufacturer treats users with more respect. Does respect come from a manufacturer whose player can apply DRM to your files and whose profit margins include payments to music companies whose products you may never have purchased and may never be interested in?
In what sense do Apple-machines fuse form with function? All they did were pack up low-quality components in a expensive box; the form has nothing to do with the function in this case.
Uh...handles molded into the case?
How about cooling tunnels and minimized cabling interference instead of fifteen fans all running amok and bundles of spaghetti?
Maybe the best example now is the new Mac Pro - which has specs comparable to this machine, but manages to come off looking, sounding, and performing even better. Oh - and it's cheaper, too.
I wonder if you'd have signed your post if you weren't just trolling?
Yes, you are locked in. I've never found a way to legally play my legally-purchased iTunes music on my main OS, Ubuntu.
-How did you buy your music?
-Does Apple claim that iTunes music is supported on Ubuntu?
-Why did you choose a music format that is incompatible with your main OS? iTunes don't play on Solaris either, but you don't see sysadmins rising up against Apple's failure to support one of the leading server OSs out there...
Face it - your're looking for a reason to complain, have access to a system that supports iTunes, but still choose to run an OS that doesn't work with iTunes.
Why don't you just channel your energy into getting Apple to support Ubuntu with iTunes or dual-boot?
Jobs is someone who had actually had relationships with members of the opposite sex, he didn't have to jump some company goldigging bimbo and briber her with $billion to have sex.
Sounds like you might have worked at Apple in the early 1980s.
Lots of conference table fucking. Lots.
What I find mildly amusing on Slashdot are all these young and idealistic IT "professionals"
Thanks for assuming who I am...but did you notice your UID is over 850k after mine?
I've been in the industry (and reading Slashdot) a hell of a lot longer than you, fella.
So current DRM schemes run into some issues with Vista. Big deal.
So tell me - at what point does it get to be too much fucking trouble - and how much money will that strategy ultimately make for the studios?
The **AA thinks that DRM will save them - and it could, if handled right - but Microsoft's vision is one of superrestrictions and flashy Zune-ish crap.
Given how buggy and restrictive Microsoft's software is for the money, you think the consumer is going to buy into that vision and experience over the long term (10-20 years)?