Funny you should mention this...I have two customers in the same building. I don't do enough work for either of them separately to want to commit to a contractual number of hours/week but I've just recently proposed to them a sharing plan where they "share me" for a certain number of hours / week.
They are seriously considering this and there's a solid chance they'll go for it. I think it's a win-win-win, really. I get a set committed # of billable hours for each of them for a time and they get a set committed level of service instead of just calling and seeing when I'm available.
I'll third this line of thinking. Trust is huge. I am self employed, run my own business doing this type of thing (and more), and have other people (sub-contractors, basically) I rely on to get specific work done that I know I can trust to do it well.
ALL my work is with former employers, people who run their own businesses, are CIOs/IT Directores, etc., and people I've known for years. I do not advertise as a general rule because I don't need to, for one, and I find word of mouth much more meaningful and effective, for two.
Think six degrees of separation...you know somebody who knows somebody, etc., and that's a good why to find somebody trustworthy, who does good work for a reasonable fee.
Your understanding does not jive with my memory. This entry in Wikipedia sums up more accurately how I remember it (I was working as a consultant doing Citrix installations and such at the time):
Microsoft licensed the source code to NT to Citrix, and in 1995 Citrix began to sell WinFrame, a stand-alone system based on Windows NT 3.51 (MultiWin). Development of WinFrame 2.0 was derailed in early 1997 when Microsoft withdrew the license to NT 4.0 from Citrix, although later negotiations led to Microsoft agreeing to license Citrix technology for Windows NT Server 4.0, resulting in Windows Terminal Server Edition. Citrix agreed not to ship a competing product, but retained a set of "enterprise-level functionality" which it could sell as an extension to Microsoft's products. This toolkit was initially sold under the name 'Metaframe.' This complementary relationship continued into the Windows 2000 and XP eras, with Citrix offering Metaframe XP and Presentation Server. [emphasis mine]
As I recall it, Microsoft basically incorporated Citrix technology into NT4 for TSE and was going to just shove Citrix in front of the bus, so to speak. Many in the press at the time were calling it a death knell for Citrix even. Citrix managed to negotiate with Microsoft, agreeing to stop selling WinFrame, a fully competitive product, and focus only on MetaFrame, their add-on product. Citrix has managed to survive and flourish; but, make no mistakes, it's not because Microsoft didn't try to cut and run.
Microsoft has licensed its source code in the past (think Citrix circa NT 3.51) to those who could meet their terms. Of course, Microsoft tried to "sweep the leg" on Citrix with NT4TSE; but Citrix, unlike so many others who have gone to bed with Microsoft, managed to survive.
Just remember about how Microsoft has *always* licensed their source code: under their terms. Sure Microsoft will license their source code. But you can bet the agreement(s) you must sign to license it will be lengthy, ambiguous where it benefits Microsoft and iron clad where it benefits Microsoft, giving only the bare minimum necessary to pacify the EU, and most definitely not free.
The DHS will be giving Stanford University, Coverity, and Symantec a $1.24 million grant to improve the security of open source software.
I fail to see how giving Symantec money will improve the security of anything unless we're talking about securities...as in Symantec stock. Once upon a time the name Norton prepended was a good sign. I am not trying to troll or incite flames, but I find Symantec (and McAfee for that matter) sorely wanting these days. I would be leery of running anything with their name attached to it on one of my boxes.
At least they only get $100,000 and the bulk goes to Standford.
The question ("Do consumers even want another format war?") makes a false assumption. Although it's off by only one single letter. The right question is:
You want secure Wi-Fi in your home? Here's how I do it:
Keep WAP signal inside your home.
I guess I'm lucky my house is built the way it is (don't ask me how it's done...I don't know) but I place my WAP in my basement. I get signal in all the important places in my home. But I can't get a signal outside for the life of me. Maybe my house is a big farady cage.
I think I could maybe buy an external antenna for the WAP and that would help, but why bother? The only advantage would be that I could surf on my back patio. Which, come to think of it, I can already do thanks to my neighbors who must've put their WAP on their roof.
How hugely successful was Animal Crossing? How about the Tekken and Soul Caliber fighters? What about the craploads of racing, sports, etc., multi-player games that are not online games?
Gaming is very much social. I, for one, can barely stand playing single player games. And I don't play online at all unless it's free. I WILL NOT pay $$/month just to play video games. There are lots of multi-player experiences to be had without subscriptions to online games.
Thanks for the acknowledgement. I really wasn't trying to be a troll...just pointing out the obvious. I now see the mods have brought my comment back from the dead and that's gratifying. I initially wanted to make some disparaging remarks about mods, especially seeing as how many other comments posted after me said basically the same thing and were getting Insightfuls and Interestings out the wazoo. That's what I get for being too blunt, I guess.
Screw all this crap, man! I'm going back to the barter system and avoiding money and taxes altogether. Anybody farmers out there on slashdot? Wanna trade some chickens and vegetables for some IT work? Anyone? Bueller?
I will not respond to your disparaging remarks about Python. I simply wish to say this:
I certainly HOPE the hype moves to Ruby and skips right over Python. That way I can continue doing my serious development work in Python and avoid the nincompoops who've nothing better to do than go apeshit over whatever the latest buzz happens to be.
Ruby can have the hype. Python will quietly continue being a highly usable, useful, and fun environment for me to do my job with under the radar.
But Gomes adds, 'Whatever early lead Gmail may have had in creating a next-generation email program, both Microsoft and Yahoo have more than caught up.
I have a yahoo.com email account. I have had it for a long time. I had it before I got my gmail.com account. Now, I hardly use it. GMail is just fantastic. And the latest changes Yahoo! has made to try to catch up can be summed up in one word: abysmal. Here's a clue to the Yahoo! folks trying to jazz up Yahoo! e-mail: stop trying to be pretty and "full of features" and just try staying out of my way. GMail manages to be feature-rich *and* stays out of my way. I don't know how they did it, but it's wonderful.
I wouldn't know anything about MSN e-mail. I wouldn't touch an MSN account with a 10' cat5 cable.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny you should mention this...I have two customers in the same building. I don't do enough work for either of them separately to want to commit to a contractual number of hours/week but I've just recently proposed to them a sharing plan where they "share me" for a certain number of hours / week.
They are seriously considering this and there's a solid chance they'll go for it. I think it's a win-win-win, really. I get a set committed # of billable hours for each of them for a time and they get a set committed level of service instead of just calling and seeing when I'm available.
This is a very good point. A lot of sys admin work is remotely doable. But something sooner or later will require physical access.
I'll third this line of thinking. Trust is huge. I am self employed, run my own business doing this type of thing (and more), and have other people (sub-contractors, basically) I rely on to get specific work done that I know I can trust to do it well.
ALL my work is with former employers, people who run their own businesses, are CIOs/IT Directores, etc., and people I've known for years. I do not advertise as a general rule because I don't need to, for one, and I find word of mouth much more meaningful and effective, for two.
Think six degrees of separation...you know somebody who knows somebody, etc., and that's a good why to find somebody trustworthy, who does good work for a reasonable fee.
As I recall it, Microsoft basically incorporated Citrix technology into NT4 for TSE and was going to just shove Citrix in front of the bus, so to speak. Many in the press at the time were calling it a death knell for Citrix even. Citrix managed to negotiate with Microsoft, agreeing to stop selling WinFrame, a fully competitive product, and focus only on MetaFrame, their add-on product. Citrix has managed to survive and flourish; but, make no mistakes, it's not because Microsoft didn't try to cut and run.
Microsoft has licensed its source code in the past (think Citrix circa NT 3.51) to those who could meet their terms. Of course, Microsoft tried to "sweep the leg" on Citrix with NT4TSE; but Citrix, unlike so many others who have gone to bed with Microsoft, managed to survive.
Just remember about how Microsoft has *always* licensed their source code: under their terms. Sure Microsoft will license their source code. But you can bet the agreement(s) you must sign to license it will be lengthy, ambiguous where it benefits Microsoft and iron clad where it benefits Microsoft, giving only the bare minimum necessary to pacify the EU, and most definitely not free.
Did you just say GOOD riddance to booth babes?
That ain't right.
He must be ignoring the facts.
No matter how hard I try, TTS always sounds horrible. Just that same robotic, metallic voice saying "Would you like to play a game?"
I fail to see how giving Symantec money will improve the security of anything unless we're talking about securities...as in Symantec stock. Once upon a time the name Norton prepended was a good sign. I am not trying to troll or incite flames, but I find Symantec (and McAfee for that matter) sorely wanting these days. I would be leery of running anything with their name attached to it on one of my boxes.
At least they only get $100,000 and the bulk goes to Standford.
The question ("Do consumers even want another format war?") makes a false assumption. Although it's off by only one single letter. The right question is:
Do consumers ever want another format war?
And the right answer is: no
fuck!
s/farady/faraday/
And I previewed that too.
I guess I'm lucky my house is built the way it is (don't ask me how it's done...I don't know) but I place my WAP in my basement. I get signal in all the important places in my home. But I can't get a signal outside for the life of me. Maybe my house is a big farady cage.
I think I could maybe buy an external antenna for the WAP and that would help, but why bother? The only advantage would be that I could surf on my back patio. Which, come to think of it, I can already do thanks to my neighbors who must've put their WAP on their roof.
Being under the influence of a goodly sum of wine as I type this, I can surely tell you no computer could possibly tell good wine from Mad Dog 20/20.
... (hic...)
Good wine ~ good art. I can't define it, but I know it when I drink it.
Oh, and God Bless Oregon.
w00t!
How hugely successful was Animal Crossing? How about the Tekken and Soul Caliber fighters? What about the craploads of racing, sports, etc., multi-player games that are not online games?
Gaming is very much social. I, for one, can barely stand playing single player games. And I don't play online at all unless it's free. I WILL NOT pay $$/month just to play video games. There are lots of multi-player experiences to be had without subscriptions to online games.
And a lot of people play them.
I am posting because I don't have mod points right now. I don't usually even mod anonymous posts at all anyway...but, damn, that was funny.
Good show, you anonymous coward you.
I already know how to secure IM and P2P apps, so this book, imho, sounds like a complete WASTE of time.
nudge nudge wink wink...say no more...
google.py: import Guido
Thanks for the acknowledgement. I really wasn't trying to be a troll...just pointing out the obvious. I now see the mods have brought my comment back from the dead and that's gratifying. I initially wanted to make some disparaging remarks about mods, especially seeing as how many other comments posted after me said basically the same thing and were getting Insightfuls and Interestings out the wazoo. That's what I get for being too blunt, I guess.
...Dvorak is a hack...so, there you have it.
Screw all this crap, man! I'm going back to the barter system and avoiding money and taxes altogether. Anybody farmers out there on slashdot? Wanna trade some chickens and vegetables for some IT work? Anyone? Bueller?
I will not respond to your disparaging remarks about Python. I simply wish to say this:
I certainly HOPE the hype moves to Ruby and skips right over Python. That way I can continue doing my serious development work in Python and avoid the nincompoops who've nothing better to do than go apeshit over whatever the latest buzz happens to be.
Ruby can have the hype. Python will quietly continue being a highly usable, useful, and fun environment for me to do my job with under the radar.
I hope.
On some level you are correct. But there definitely is such a thing as an Atari 1200XL, which is what I meant.
I wouldn't know anything about MSN e-mail. I wouldn't touch an MSN account with a 10' cat5 cable.
Oh, I almost forgot: YMMV.