I completely agree with your post, but many employers will not perceive writing tests as productive.
In this case, the manager would probably see them as a waste of time since the application is already perceived as a success. Any tests that found deficiencies would be branded as flawed.
In too many cases, managers "just want the app to work" - they don't care about details and the OP would be seen as inflexible and suitable for a "fast paced work environment."
Leaving a project very early on because of concerns isn't goingto cause any problems. Staying on a project that fails and getting the blame for could most certainly affect future job prospects - especially if a recruiter is involved and it hurts their relationship with the client.
Nobody cares about what gets shown on sign in. That is the only time that Metro is not an annoyance.
We're referring to launching apps during a work session.
It's not clear why a Mac user is lecturing Windows users on the virtues of Windows 8/Metro. It's clear that you don't use Windows for anything significant.
No, users don't want a start screen that is full screen and completely obscures the other windows that are loaded. On a desktop it's distracting - especially in a multi-monitor setup.
You're leaving out the fact that the start screen is full screen. This has been discussed many, many times.
This isn't a case of people just not wanting change - it's a case of trying to force a square peg (tablet/phone UI) in a round hole (desktop environment).
Not sure you read or understood my post. I want Microsoft to succeed as I'm a.NET developer. I am worried, however, that this misguided stubbornness with Metro is going to start eroding the stranglehold that Microsoft has enjoyed in the enterprise.
Whether you want to admit it or not, the Metro interface does not belong on a server.
The point is whether the oil will be extracted, refined, exported and used with or without this pipeline. The State Dept is in a much better position to answer that question than the EPA or climate scientists.
Oil prices are set on a global market. China is not paying anyone $360 for a barrel of oil - especially not for the Canadian oil shale that requires more expensive refinement.
You are confusing gasoline (petrol) prices that are mostly influenced by taxes with the price of oil that is set in a global market.
I think Microsoft is using Windows 8 to force the Windows Phone UI down everyone's throat. Eventually, they will give up.
Their stubbornness is going to start affecting their enterprise business, so they need to wise up soon. Fortunately, the new CEO comes from the enterprise side so he will likely understand that they're playing with fire.
Its a whole lot of noise about nothing. If you really dont like it then set boot-to-desktop and then the only time you need to see the only thing that has changed (the start screen) is if you need to open an application that isnt pinned to the taskbar
You make it sound like that scenario is rare - it's not and it's very frustrating.
You missed the point. I'm not talking about intercepting the incoming missiles.
The point is the extraordinary deterrent value of an immediate and devastating response. That pretty much eliminates anyone trying to win via a "first strike".
It also pretty much prevents anyone from trying a false flag attempt as the immediate response would make the world almost unlivable - even for people think they could wait it out in caves.
Actually, it's more important that everyone knows that a immediate response would be forthcoming that would essentially wipe out the rest of the world. That pretty much ensures that there won't be a missile to respond to in the first place.
No they aren't. Local law enforcement can request information without a warrant from companies (credit card companies, email providers, banks, etc) that will give them your private information. You would never be notified that this information had been given out.
Remember, almost all companies state that they "fully cooperate with law enforcement".
Unlikely. If they have a non-frivolous legal claim
That is another huge problem that needs to be addressed though. Companies have used legal threats as a means to extort money from targets who either cannot afford a legal defense or the cost of the defense is greater than the extortion amount.
The RIAA, MPAA and Directv do this by threatening to sue suspected pirates if they did not give them $3,000.
Maybe there should be more options than just "approved" or "rejected". There could be a weaker status than "approved" that forces the burden on the patent holder if it is ever challenged.
EU should really stand up and announce that such spying is totally unacceptable, any person caught to be part of such will serve serious jail time, diplomatic immunity or not.
Spying is already a capital offense in most countries and has been for thousands of years. Diplomatic immunity has never been a shield.
Slashdot Mirror
I completely agree with your post, but many employers will not perceive writing tests as productive.
In this case, the manager would probably see them as a waste of time since the application is already perceived as a success. Any tests that found deficiencies would be branded as flawed.
In too many cases, managers "just want the app to work" - they don't care about details and the OP would be seen as inflexible and suitable for a "fast paced work environment."
Leaving a project very early on because of concerns isn't goingto cause any problems. Staying on a project that fails and getting the blame for could most certainly affect future job prospects - especially if a recruiter is involved and it hurts their relationship with the client.
Nobody cares about what gets shown on sign in. That is the only time that Metro is not an annoyance.
We're referring to launching apps during a work session.
It's not clear why a Mac user is lecturing Windows users on the virtues of Windows 8/Metro. It's clear that you don't use Windows for anything significant.
No, users don't want a start screen that is full screen and completely obscures the other windows that are loaded. On a desktop it's distracting - especially in a multi-monitor setup.
You're leaving out the fact that the start screen is full screen. This has been discussed many, many times.
This isn't a case of people just not wanting change - it's a case of trying to force a square peg (tablet/phone UI) in a round hole (desktop environment).
Sounds like things are tough all over
Not sure you read or understood my post. I want Microsoft to succeed as I'm a .NET developer. I am worried, however, that this misguided stubbornness with Metro is going to start eroding the stranglehold that Microsoft has enjoyed in the enterprise.
Whether you want to admit it or not, the Metro interface does not belong on a server.
The point is whether the oil will be extracted, refined, exported and used with or without this pipeline. The State Dept is in a much better position to answer that question than the EPA or climate scientists.
The State Dept is more likely to know if the oil would be extracted anyway even without the pipeline. How would the EPA know anything about that?
Oil is a global commodity so it doesn't matter who buys it.
It doesn't matter where it goes as oil is a commodity priced in a global market.
Oil prices are set on a global market. China is not paying anyone $360 for a barrel of oil - especially not for the Canadian oil shale that requires more expensive refinement.
You are confusing gasoline (petrol) prices that are mostly influenced by taxes with the price of oil that is set in a global market.
I think Microsoft is using Windows 8 to force the Windows Phone UI down everyone's throat. Eventually, they will give up.
Their stubbornness is going to start affecting their enterprise business, so they need to wise up soon. Fortunately, the new CEO comes from the enterprise side so he will likely understand that they're playing with fire.
Its a whole lot of noise about nothing. If you really dont like it then set boot-to-desktop and then the only time you need to see the only thing that has changed (the start screen) is if you need to open an application that isnt pinned to the taskbar
You make it sound like that scenario is rare - it's not and it's very frustrating.
Sorry, I misread your response. I get what you're saying but I didn't mean "wipe out the rest of the world" literally.
The destruction and its aftermath would eventually destroy most of the world's human population.
You missed the point. I'm not talking about intercepting the incoming missiles.
The point is the extraordinary deterrent value of an immediate and devastating response. That pretty much eliminates anyone trying to win via a "first strike".
It also pretty much prevents anyone from trying a false flag attempt as the immediate response would make the world almost unlivable - even for people think they could wait it out in caves.
Actually, it's more important that everyone knows that a immediate response would be forthcoming that would essentially wipe out the rest of the world. That pretty much ensures that there won't be a missile to respond to in the first place.
No they aren't. Local law enforcement can request information without a warrant from companies (credit card companies, email providers, banks, etc) that will give them your private information. You would never be notified that this information had been given out.
Remember, almost all companies state that they "fully cooperate with law enforcement".
We've had 2 disasters shortly after "run NASA like a business" campaigns.
Weren't there some disasters before that as well?
Space travel is inherently dangerous and many feel that NASA has actually become too risk adverse.
Unlikely. If they have a non-frivolous legal claim
That is another huge problem that needs to be addressed though. Companies have used legal threats as a means to extort money from targets who either cannot afford a legal defense or the cost of the defense is greater than the extortion amount.
The RIAA, MPAA and Directv do this by threatening to sue suspected pirates if they did not give them $3,000.
Maybe there should be more options than just "approved" or "rejected". There could be a weaker status than "approved" that forces the burden on the patent holder if it is ever challenged.
As others have pointed out, this isn't "they do it too, so it's ok defense."
Others in this thread have already explained the fallacy in your thinking.
EU should really stand up and announce that such spying is totally unacceptable, any person caught to be part of such will serve serious jail time, diplomatic immunity or not.
Spying is already a capital offense in most countries and has been for thousands of years. Diplomatic immunity has never been a shield.
China already spies on the US and American intelligence agencies try to mitigate and minimize that. China does the same thing to foreign spies.
This is not anything new. The problem is that Snowden is trying to cripple American agencies while strengthening those of Russia and China.
Allies have always spied on each other. You think that the UK, Israel and Russia don't spy on the US?