Yes Sony and MSFT could do exactly that...not likely directly but I could see subsidiaries of each doing that. It has happened before. Atari made games for coleco and vice versa and Mattel ported some of their intellivision games to atari and vice versa in the 1980s at the height of their business. It could happen again through game publishing subsidiaries easily and in fact is a very likely future scenario.
...in high tech. That is the simplest explanation.
MSFT already makes more from android through its patent racketeering operation than from the sale of lumias. Nokia would have an advantage using android as it would not have to pay that protection money to a third party. MSFT can embrace and extend android like anyone else and it is a hedge against any possibility of failure for windows phone though I think the chances of winphone failing are diminishing over time.
This is just how business works. Apple made the II using a CPU from MOS which was a subsidiary of arch rival Commodore. Today the vast majority of android handhelds use ARM architecture which comes from a company who's largest shareholder is Apple and Apples biggest enemy has been its biggest component supplier in mobile devices over the years.
It is that simple. High tech companies are like the local yokels from Deliverance.
The oil inudstry where I am kills less birds than the wind farms in the area, and the amount killed by wind farms is already quite small, yet the oil industry is required by law to be fully liable for all bird deaths and must, at their own expense, install countermeadures to drive birds away from hazardous areas (scarecrows, air cannons, supersonic noise makers, etc). Even if only a few dozen birds die in a year, and even though none are endangered they are rightly held fully accountable in that respect, as are all industrial operations in my juristiction.
So, tell me why being "carbon neutral" gives a wind farm a free pass to kill animals and destroy habitat?
...you just need to be aware of the bias. All articles have bias to some degree; writing completely without bias cannot effectively convey ideas--lack of bias reduces an article of writing to nothing but an enumeration of facts. Bias is required to support arguments and formulate ideas, or else you are just making the worlds most boring encyclopaedia.
Thus, it is best to actively seek out and focus on biased articles and apply critical thinking--and look at articles biased on BOTH sides. So, don't b!tch about the bias in an article being against your personal views, go out and seek another article biased towards the opposite side of the argument and evaluate each argument on its merits.
How many birds are killed by coal pollution might be part of a valid counter-argument but it does not invalidate the fact that wind tubines kill eagles and other birds, nor the fact that the government is giving the industry preferrential treatment. Where I live Oil Sands is a major source of energy, and upgrader plants (particularly the oldest ones) have tailings ponds. When countermeasures fail and several dozen birds land on the toxic tailings and die the incident is widely reported and the oil companies are held to account, paying thousands per bird found. If they are held fully liable and are subject to mandated full disclosure of all animal fatalities resulting from their operations then how come wind farms get a free pass?
Wind makes no CO2 and is renewable and that is good, but killing wildlife and destroying habitat is bad no matter who does it, and everyone who does it should be responsible for it. We don't give drivers of hybrid cars a free pass if they are at fault in an accident or let them pour their used oil into a storm drain because their cars have a smaller carbon footprint--that would be asinine! Just because an energy source is renewable doesn't mean it has no impact on the environment (just look at how devestating renewable hydroelectric power has been to the environment in China as an example). ALL energy development must be done sustainably throughout the lifecycle. You could never get a nuclear plant built adjacent to a residential neigbourhood, you couldn't get Keystone XL bulit across an aquifer and you wouldn't give BP a break on the cleanup costs of Deepwater Horizon. You shouldn't give a wind farm of hundreds of turbines covering hundreds of acres a free pass on killing birds, destroying habitats and affecting the health of nearby residents just because it is "carbon free".
...in the Athabasca region where the Canadian oil sands are...literally the only people not employed there are not employable due to disability or other personal issues...indeed many workers live all over Canada and fly in for their shifts and stay in company work camps
Automating these trucks would free up workers for other much needed labour elsewhere plus make operations safer and more efficient.
Yeah, those big governments in places like Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal have been stellar examples of responsible and capable government. Perhaps you should take your own advice about the news.
Big intrusive government that actually works well in Europe has been the exception not the rule.
....the hybrid equivalent to the Cadillac Cimmaron for the 21st century.
Looks are a matter of taste. I for one do not care for a half acre if gaudy chrome grille, nor the headlights that appear to have melted and slid up onto the fenders. It makes even the new Cherokee look pretty.
Inside looks nice but 5000 dollar nice? Too many buttons. Just like Tesla and many others I am annoyed by the aversion towards nice big easy to use dials for climate control. Both have gimmicky interiors.
Not sure where the 10 year lifespan comes from...not seen any evidence that the Tesla could not last longer or that replacing batteries would not be cost effective. Concern about charge time is valid...but again that can be addressed in less expensive ways than the hybrid caddy.
Your comments about company longevity are totally baseless as well. GM is technically no older than Tesla...the original GM went bankrupt and folded in the recession. Its viable assets were bought up by a new legal entity back by government billions...they are no better than Tesla in that respect...probably worse for all the billions spent to keep some form of GM in existence. Trsls is established enough already that even if they went under someone would back/support the vehicles.
I use Gimp maybe one every other month. I use LibreOffice several hours a day 5 to 6 days a week, since it the standard issue office suite in my workplace.
Why port apps to android that already work in other supported Linux operating systems? Android uses a Linux kernel so why not virtualised instance of android within a full Linux OS instead? Just put a dalvik VM and whatnot in there and run android apps within a window side by side with LibreOffice or other native apps?
Then you don't need to reboot or have dual mode operation.
...though in France their national police have a wider mandate and are involved in activities similar to state troopers. They are NOT the same as US military police at all.
The RCMP in Canada is a much better comparison to what France has. They are involved in both FBI type activities as well as things like traffic enforcement outside urban centres in provinces that do not have their own police forces.
...about layout that is fluid/elastic? What makes it on par with aerospace engineering? IT ISN'T THAT HARD! It is not that much to ask for really! Using browser's full width has been done successfully on/. for many years now--what is with this throwback to fixed width that leaves 50% of my maximised browser window blank? I to NOT want to party like it's 1999!
Leave the shiney-chromey left and right columns fixed for all I care, but PLEASE--push them to the EDGES and use the flexible space for the main content.
I do like the updated style/presentation, I am not looking for the site to do ALL the thinking for me--the ONLY thing I am really wanting is a website that uses the width of my browser! The existing/old site does this already so it CANT BE THAT HARD. In my opinion that ONE thing would transform the beta site from one I'd spend minimal time on to one that would be my home page. HONESTLY.
There is some confusion about what is a GNOME-based application and what is part of the GNOME environment itself.
For example Shotwell is a third-party GNOME based application. It has never been part of the GNOME project--not a GNOME component. Rather, it has merely been the most commonly used app for photo management and viewing as packaged by distributions. Shotwell supplanted F-Spot becaus the latter was built with.NET/Mono and many had concerns about potential MSFT-interference.
GNOME did not have final say on either F-Spot OR Shotwell given they weren't GNOME desktop components--just apps designed to work on GNOME. Until now there WAS no official default app. Now there is:: GNOME Photos.
As such, I expect that GNOME Photos, Music, Notes, Maps, etc. will continue for the long term as the "defaults" as they are new official GNOME components. Furthermore I suspect Shotwell, Rythmbox, etc will continue on as alternatives, likely with some enhanced capabilites, different feature sets, etc. just as WEB (aka epiphany) is the "official" GNOME browser client it is still commonly (or even normally) supplanted by a 3rd party browser.
On my PC running GNOME 3.8 resuming from lock screen is instantaneous. You have something wrong with your system.
I suspend by closing my laptop lid--not tried any other way but that works.
I have a sandy-bridge qaud core i7 with 16 gigs ram...pretty good spec but not what as good as you have and I can tell you there is no lag to speak of. Boots fast, everything responds instantly. And that is running my Radeon card on LOW POWER (slow) profile mode. Are you sure you have it installed right? Video driver issues maybe? Something hoging CPU?
How much crap do you have in you top bar if your clock is cut off. Your calendar takes 2-5 seconds to come up? WTF? Mine comes up in MILLIseconds.
Either you are BSing us all or you have wider system issues. This is NOT what I've seen with GNOME3. Even a several-years-old single Core 2 desktop with Intel 4500 integrated graphics and far less RAM I have can do better at it!
But I *DO* repect your opinion. You don't like GNOME, that is fine. You've stated reasons why you don't like GNOME. That is great. That is on topic, even if I don't entirely agree (though GNOME 3 *does* have room for improvement).
That said, "GNOME 3 sucks I use MATE" and then going on to expound about how wonderfully traditional MATE is is OFF TOPIC. The article is about the release of GNOME 3. Unless you are going to make some observation about GNOME 3 beyond a one line "sucks" comment then said comment is very deservedly modded into oblivion.
We've heard it all before. It is a broken record, it is a dead horse that people just can't stop beating. If you must be critical be constructive and be a bit specific about what needs improvement. We do NOT need to hear "GNOME 3 sucks". That is less than useless. Go away and let *intelligent* critics have some input (I would even put up with Torvalds or DeRaadt style profanity laden rants so long as they have meaningful point to them).
You can never make anyone happy.
on
GNOME 3.10 Released
·
· Score: 4, Informative
You know, I remember, many years ago now, an article that got posted on/. about usability of the Linux desktop for casual/beginner/"regualr people" users. GNOME and KDE were examined. At the time Gnome 2.x was fairly new.
One of the prominent complaints (one that got MSFT and AAPL fanbois gloating) was how people struggled with the exotic names for everyday applications.
So...you have to click this GIMP thingy to edit pictures? To go ont he web you need to clock "Konqueror" or "Galeon" (the latter of which morphed into "Epiphany"--so much more clear what it does eh?). To burn a CD I need "Brasero", etc.
The user had to rely on icons--sometimes they were not so useful either.
So the GNOME people have finally done something about it and name the app that helps you install software "Software", and call the web browser "web" instead of "Epihpany"...makes sense considering the feedback right? Well, now they are being mocked by experienced users for the unimaginative names. It's not like a computer literate person can't figure out what "WEB" does (oh gee, that must be the GNOME web browser...well isn't that more boring than Epiphany, but I guess now Aunt Martha will know how to get on the web).
By the way--"WEB" is just Epiphany renamed--the GNOM browser. Firefox/Iceweasel or Chromium still appear with their respective names/icons, so you can relax unlessyou are among the 1% of GNOME users who just use the GNOME Web browser and nothing else.
(As I type this I use GNOME 3.8 from Debian unstable and experimental packages--'tis a great improvement over 3.4 and earlier that so many still use or base their first impressions on--hopefully 3.10 will be packaged for Debian in due time--pwehaps a couple weeks before 3.12 comes out;-)
ERP software is not an out of box application. It is a development platform for creating line of business apps. It should be treated like a web app framework. It provides a user interface and workflow engine along with a set of modules that you can implement on top to provide accounting, inventory control, and other business functions. But it has to be programmed, and you also may have to modify your business procedures to better work within the confines of the framework as well.
Perhaps that is why do many implementations fail. ERP is sold as off the shelf or ready made. It is not. You must go through a proper software dev lifecycle and PROGRAM an ERP as if it was a fancy visual studio for business. ERP merely saves time by providing the framework...the boilerplate code...vs. from scratch. So it should be devoted the appropriate time and resources regardless of how you have to feed the data in from a legacy system etc.
OpenERP has issues that you might not want to deal with. Some technical like using floats where decimals should be for example, and some political, similar to what SQL Ledger went through (OpenERP is commercially backed and some fundamental needs as well as developer/integrator participation requires $$$). The real pain point is that it has no supported upgrade path between major releases, and the people who run the project actively interfere with community efforts to provide upgrade tools that are open. Upgrading seems to be seen as a primary part of their business model.
Tryton is a fork of OpenERP community edition managed by a nonprofit group of developer-users. It's code base has diverged a fair bit by now and is much more solid, and I've been able to upgrade between releases without the hassle as testing and migration abilities are considered important core priorities.
The energy to pump the CO2 into the ground isn't wasted. The force of pushing it down a well displaces residual oil and gas and allows more petroleum to be extracted from each well. Once liquid fluids have done the fracturing the CO2 can perform some degree of enhanced oil recovery.
It could potentially reduce the carbon footprint of so called dirty American and Canadian petroleum, reduce consumption of toxic fracking fluids etc. We already push natural gas, steam, nitrogen and all sorts of stuff into the ground to help get petroleum out
The question does not have enough detail to make ultimate judgments on the approach they attempted, but what is there suggests what mistakes they made.
Firstly you don't have to yel at the m SUPPORT! Well duh, that is the first thing anyone would think (including these people as well). Purchase a support contract is obvious.
Which brings me to the other point you seemed to miss completely--that this budget surplus of $20,000 had to be "spent" AND PRODUCTS/SERVICES RENDERED within the fiscal year, which was only 4 weeks or less by the time the offers went out! I think is is quite possible that making out four $5000 invoices for just a couple WEEKS of a support contract and making it look legitimate could be a challenge without some legitimate record of services or products delivered over that short period (where are the transmittals? Reports? Bills of Lading? Meeting minutes? Receipts for expenses?). To make it unsuspicious would require some degree of fabrication (inventing face documents, back-dating, etc), and then you are in murky ethical territory.
So, making a superficial post without giving even cursory thought to what was in TFA, then b!tching about the decline in the quality of discussion of others despite the lack of effort put in by yourself, I think you've been rightfully down-modded.
transparency != complexity. Having relatives who worked in the DND I know that it is mostly about bureaucratic inertia at best and NOT being fair at worst.
Having to follow public tender rules designed to manage huge projects for purchasing hand tools, power cords, and other sundry items is not reasonable nor is it expected. It is done because of the culture of the organisation, and sometimes to REDUCE transparency. The rules do NOT say such illogical accounting procedures that average out costs like that are mandatory. in fact the strategy in that environment is chosen to REDUCE transparency. You sign a big huge contract then single source all under that one party and do the LEAST amount of breakdown as required by law. Sometimes it is done to hide shenanigans, other times it is because of "national security" (legitimately). Then some wag asks "wow your tools budget is huge--what does a hammer cost" but there is no accounting for individual tools, so some bean counter is assigned to pull a number out of his butt (hmmm..inventory control shows 'x' hammers added, sum('quantity')='y' and total dollars spent was 'z' so hammercost=z*x/y... hmmm that is $20k...oh well it's a number and they wanted a number so there it is). But it isn't really--they just fill out a req form for some hammers then send it to purchasing then hammers arrive...and no money or invoices or anything passes hands until the end of a fiscal period, so that is all they have to go on.
Again, it is quite the opposite of "transparent" and "fair"--it is all about "minimum compliance"...follow the law to the letter and do no more, because the more detail is available the more questions get asked. The only thing that makes it "fair" is that the rules are the same for all (the fact the rules are stupid and unworkable for many matters not).
...because I cannot figure any other reason you would thing such a practice is "ttotally normal". It does happen, it is on the fuzzy legal line where it probably wouldn't result in legal trouble yes. However, this is FAR from "totally normal".
The spending pattern you talk about *IS* a common situation, though in my experience it is mostly what happens in public institutions or perhaps a few of the largest of corporations in departments that are "revenue sinks" rather than "revenue generators". That is because of the budget cultire. Managers are compensated and their departments staffed based on a budget handed down in a political process. Such operations are not profit driven--the goal is to reach a "zero balance". Chronic deficit spending can be politically harmful, but chronic UNDERspending makes you a target for budget cutbacks--it is perverse but that is what happens--there is no incentive for efficiency in such an operation (and is why socialised industries without private competition are notoriously bureaucratic and inefficient).
In Canada political pundits call this "March Madness" because that is the fiscal year end, when federal government offices that are in surplus spend like drunken sailors, whilst at the same time politicians grandstand and court lobbyists and so forth at the same time. Until the Great Recession started it really was madness, becasue the whole government had been operating in surplus for many years and every department tried to maximise their spending to motivate expansion of their budgets. Now with a few years of deficits they've sobered up a bit, but the motivation to spend all allocations is still there to try and defend against cutbacks.
What is NOT commonplace at all these days is a trumped up "purchase" of imaginary products or services because if the Auditor General finds such items it could (and has) become a political mess--this is exactly what happened in the "sponsorship scandal" in Canada, where the federal government earmarked many millions of dollars to campaigning against a vote in Quebec to secede from Canada. a very large portion of that money was not spent on "real" materials and services, so government officials "bought" fake marketing services--worst of all the "supppliers" of those fake services were mostly supporters of the ruling Liberal party of the day who in turn made nice donations to the party ini the following elections (essentially funneling taxpayer revenue into the political party).
Since that scandal the government has been under a microscope over questionable purchases--no matter what the scale. Presently there is a bit of a scandal over expenses filed by Senate members--and though it is literally about %1 the size of the sponsorship scandal it has been very damaging politically. Now, say that a gov't department approached you unsolicited and said "here is $5000--you don't need to do anything but send us an invoice" would it not cause you to pause? Even if they wanted nothing else what would happn if it surfaced? Would you want to be associated with an unethical scheme of this nature? What if you had donated to the ruling party in the past personally? Optics of that are terrible.
I'd have to say that I woud not take this kind of "money for nothing" for just such a reason, whether it was from a gov't department or a corporate windfall. It may not be obviously illegal but it is ethically dubious and bad optics--enough to raise red flags in an audit. I would want no part of that.
There is another problem with this as well not even related to the above. If these project maintainers get money in exchange for an invoice for any reason it cannot be a "donation" or "gift" on the books--and that has significant tax implications especially if the FOSS project is a registered foundation or simply a personal project. In such cases unless proper services can be delivered and the amount is large enough it may be less trouble financially or legally to accept a "donation" in the form of a fake invoice. And in this c
Slashdot Mirror
Yes Sony and MSFT could do exactly that...not likely directly but I could see subsidiaries of each doing that. It has happened before. Atari made games for coleco and vice versa and Mattel ported some of their intellivision games to atari and vice versa in the 1980s at the height of their business. It could happen again through game publishing subsidiaries easily and in fact is a very likely future scenario.
...in high tech. That is the simplest explanation.
MSFT already makes more from android through its patent racketeering operation than from the sale of lumias. Nokia would have an advantage using android as it would not have to pay that protection money to a third party. MSFT can embrace and extend android like anyone else and it is a hedge against any possibility of failure for windows phone though I think the chances of winphone failing are diminishing over time.
This is just how business works. Apple made the II using a CPU from MOS which was a subsidiary of arch rival Commodore. Today the vast majority of android handhelds use ARM architecture which comes from a company who's largest shareholder is Apple and Apples biggest enemy has been its biggest component supplier in mobile devices over the years.
It is that simple. High tech companies are like the local yokels from Deliverance.
FAIRNESS matters.
The oil inudstry where I am kills less birds than the wind farms in the area, and the amount killed by wind farms is already quite small, yet the oil industry is required by law to be fully liable for all bird deaths and must, at their own expense, install countermeadures to drive birds away from hazardous areas (scarecrows, air cannons, supersonic noise makers, etc). Even if only a few dozen birds die in a year, and even though none are endangered they are rightly held fully accountable in that respect, as are all industrial operations in my juristiction.
So, tell me why being "carbon neutral" gives a wind farm a free pass to kill animals and destroy habitat?
...you just need to be aware of the bias. All articles have bias to some degree; writing completely without bias cannot effectively convey ideas--lack of bias reduces an article of writing to nothing but an enumeration of facts. Bias is required to support arguments and formulate ideas, or else you are just making the worlds most boring encyclopaedia.
Thus, it is best to actively seek out and focus on biased articles and apply critical thinking--and look at articles biased on BOTH sides. So, don't b!tch about the bias in an article being against your personal views, go out and seek another article biased towards the opposite side of the argument and evaluate each argument on its merits.
How many birds are killed by coal pollution might be part of a valid counter-argument but it does not invalidate the fact that wind tubines kill eagles and other birds, nor the fact that the government is giving the industry preferrential treatment. Where I live Oil Sands is a major source of energy, and upgrader plants (particularly the oldest ones) have tailings ponds. When countermeasures fail and several dozen birds land on the toxic tailings and die the incident is widely reported and the oil companies are held to account, paying thousands per bird found. If they are held fully liable and are subject to mandated full disclosure of all animal fatalities resulting from their operations then how come wind farms get a free pass?
Wind makes no CO2 and is renewable and that is good, but killing wildlife and destroying habitat is bad no matter who does it, and everyone who does it should be responsible for it. We don't give drivers of hybrid cars a free pass if they are at fault in an accident or let them pour their used oil into a storm drain because their cars have a smaller carbon footprint--that would be asinine! Just because an energy source is renewable doesn't mean it has no impact on the environment (just look at how devestating renewable hydroelectric power has been to the environment in China as an example). ALL energy development must be done sustainably throughout the lifecycle. You could never get a nuclear plant built adjacent to a residential neigbourhood, you couldn't get Keystone XL bulit across an aquifer and you wouldn't give BP a break on the cleanup costs of Deepwater Horizon. You shouldn't give a wind farm of hundreds of turbines covering hundreds of acres a free pass on killing birds, destroying habitats and affecting the health of nearby residents just because it is "carbon free".
...for about five desktop computers.
Hey, wise men have said dumber things...
Its not like Apple is a very good corporate citizen either...they've done their own affair share of stealing ideas too.
...in the Athabasca region where the Canadian oil sands are...literally the only people not employed there are not employable due to disability or other personal issues...indeed many workers live all over Canada and fly in for their shifts and stay in company work camps
Automating these trucks would free up workers for other much needed labour elsewhere plus make operations safer and more efficient.
We should do k to EUROPE?
Yeah, those big governments in places like Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal have been stellar examples of responsible and capable government. Perhaps you should take your own advice about the news.
Big intrusive government that actually works well in Europe has been the exception not the rule.
Yeah...it is almost Aztec ugly.
....the hybrid equivalent to the Cadillac Cimmaron for the 21st century.
Looks are a matter of taste. I for one do not care for a half acre if gaudy chrome grille, nor the headlights that appear to have melted and slid up onto the fenders. It makes even the new Cherokee look pretty.
Inside looks nice but 5000 dollar nice? Too many buttons. Just like Tesla and many others I am annoyed by the aversion towards nice big easy to use dials for climate control. Both have gimmicky interiors.
Not sure where the 10 year lifespan comes from...not seen any evidence that the Tesla could not last longer or that replacing batteries would not be cost effective. Concern about charge time is valid...but again that can be addressed in less expensive ways than the hybrid caddy.
Your comments about company longevity are totally baseless as well. GM is technically no older than Tesla...the original GM went bankrupt and folded in the recession. Its viable assets were bought up by a new legal entity back by government billions...they are no better than Tesla in that respect...probably worse for all the billions spent to keep some form of GM in existence. Trsls is established enough already that even if they went under someone would back/support the vehicles.
I use Gimp maybe one every other month. I use LibreOffice several hours a day 5 to 6 days a week, since it the standard issue office suite in my workplace.
Why port apps to android that already work in other supported Linux operating systems? Android uses a Linux kernel so why not virtualised instance of android within a full Linux OS instead? Just put a dalvik VM and whatnot in there and run android apps within a window side by side with LibreOffice or other native apps?
Then you don't need to reboot or have dual mode operation.
...though in France their national police have a wider mandate and are involved in activities similar to state troopers. They are NOT the same as US military police at all.
The RCMP in Canada is a much better comparison to what France has. They are involved in both FBI type activities as well as things like traffic enforcement outside urban centres in provinces that do not have their own police forces.
Mugging is physical violence. DRM is intellectual violence.
...about layout that is fluid/elastic? What makes it on par with aerospace engineering? IT ISN'T THAT HARD! It is not that much to ask for really! Using browser's full width has been done successfully on /. for many years now--what is with this throwback to fixed width that leaves 50% of my maximised browser window blank? I to NOT want to party like it's 1999!
Leave the shiney-chromey left and right columns fixed for all I care, but PLEASE--push them to the EDGES and use the flexible space for the main content.
I do like the updated style/presentation, I am not looking for the site to do ALL the thinking for me--the ONLY thing I am really wanting is a website that uses the width of my browser! The existing/old site does this already so it CANT BE THAT HARD. In my opinion that ONE thing would transform the beta site from one I'd spend minimal time on to one that would be my home page. HONESTLY.
There is some confusion about what is a GNOME-based application and what is part of the GNOME environment itself.
For example Shotwell is a third-party GNOME based application. It has never been part of the GNOME project--not a GNOME component. Rather, it has merely been the most commonly used app for photo management and viewing as packaged by distributions. Shotwell supplanted F-Spot becaus the latter was built with .NET/Mono and many had concerns about potential MSFT-interference.
GNOME did not have final say on either F-Spot OR Shotwell given they weren't GNOME desktop components--just apps designed to work on GNOME. Until now there WAS no official default app. Now there is:: GNOME Photos.
As such, I expect that GNOME Photos, Music, Notes, Maps, etc. will continue for the long term as the "defaults" as they are new official GNOME components. Furthermore I suspect Shotwell, Rythmbox, etc will continue on as alternatives, likely with some enhanced capabilites, different feature sets, etc. just as WEB (aka epiphany) is the "official" GNOME browser client it is still commonly (or even normally) supplanted by a 3rd party browser.
On my PC running GNOME 3.8 resuming from lock screen is instantaneous. You have something wrong with your system.
I suspend by closing my laptop lid--not tried any other way but that works.
I have a sandy-bridge qaud core i7 with 16 gigs ram...pretty good spec but not what as good as you have and I can tell you there is no lag to speak of. Boots fast, everything responds instantly. And that is running my Radeon card on LOW POWER (slow) profile mode. Are you sure you have it installed right? Video driver issues maybe? Something hoging CPU?
How much crap do you have in you top bar if your clock is cut off. Your calendar takes 2-5 seconds to come up? WTF? Mine comes up in MILLIseconds.
Either you are BSing us all or you have wider system issues. This is NOT what I've seen with GNOME3. Even a several-years-old single Core 2 desktop with Intel 4500 integrated graphics and far less RAM I have can do better at it!
But I *DO* repect your opinion. You don't like GNOME, that is fine. You've stated reasons why you don't like GNOME. That is great. That is on topic, even if I don't entirely agree (though GNOME 3 *does* have room for improvement).
That said, "GNOME 3 sucks I use MATE" and then going on to expound about how wonderfully traditional MATE is is OFF TOPIC. The article is about the release of GNOME 3. Unless you are going to make some observation about GNOME 3 beyond a one line "sucks" comment then said comment is very deservedly modded into oblivion.
We've heard it all before. It is a broken record, it is a dead horse that people just can't stop beating. If you must be critical be constructive and be a bit specific about what needs improvement. We do NOT need to hear "GNOME 3 sucks". That is less than useless. Go away and let *intelligent* critics have some input (I would even put up with Torvalds or DeRaadt style profanity laden rants so long as they have meaningful point to them).
You know, I remember, many years ago now, an article that got posted on /. about usability of the Linux desktop for casual/beginner/"regualr people" users. GNOME and KDE were examined. At the time Gnome 2.x was fairly new.
One of the prominent complaints (one that got MSFT and AAPL fanbois gloating) was how people struggled with the exotic names for everyday applications.
So...you have to click this GIMP thingy to edit pictures? To go ont he web you need to clock "Konqueror" or "Galeon" (the latter of which morphed into "Epiphany"--so much more clear what it does eh?). To burn a CD I need "Brasero", etc.
The user had to rely on icons--sometimes they were not so useful either.
So the GNOME people have finally done something about it and name the app that helps you install software "Software", and call the web browser "web" instead of "Epihpany"...makes sense considering the feedback right? Well, now they are being mocked by experienced users for the unimaginative names. It's not like a computer literate person can't figure out what "WEB" does (oh gee, that must be the GNOME web browser...well isn't that more boring than Epiphany, but I guess now Aunt Martha will know how to get on the web).
By the way--"WEB" is just Epiphany renamed--the GNOM browser. Firefox/Iceweasel or Chromium still appear with their respective names/icons, so you can relax unlessyou are among the 1% of GNOME users who just use the GNOME Web browser and nothing else.
(As I type this I use GNOME 3.8 from Debian unstable and experimental packages--'tis a great improvement over 3.4 and earlier that so many still use or base their first impressions on--hopefully 3.10 will be packaged for Debian in due time--pwehaps a couple weeks before 3.12 comes out ;-)
ERP software is not an out of box application. It is a development platform for creating line of business apps. It should be treated like a web app framework. It provides a user interface and workflow engine along with a set of modules that you can implement on top to provide accounting, inventory control, and other business functions. But it has to be programmed, and you also may have to modify your business procedures to better work within the confines of the framework as well.
Perhaps that is why do many implementations fail. ERP is sold as off the shelf or ready made. It is not. You must go through a proper software dev lifecycle and PROGRAM an ERP as if it was a fancy visual studio for business. ERP merely saves time by providing the framework...the boilerplate code...vs. from scratch. So it should be devoted the appropriate time and resources regardless of how you have to feed the data in from a legacy system etc.
OpenERP has issues that you might not want to deal with. Some technical like using floats where decimals should be for example, and some political, similar to what SQL Ledger went through (OpenERP is commercially backed and some fundamental needs as well as developer/integrator participation requires $$$). The real pain point is that it has no supported upgrade path between major releases, and the people who run the project actively interfere with community efforts to provide upgrade tools that are open. Upgrading seems to be seen as a primary part of their business model.
Tryton is a fork of OpenERP community edition managed by a nonprofit group of developer-users. It's code base has diverged a fair bit by now and is much more solid, and I've been able to upgrade between releases without the hassle as testing and migration abilities are considered important core priorities.
Might be worth considering...
The energy to pump the CO2 into the ground isn't wasted. The force of pushing it down a well displaces residual oil and gas and allows more petroleum to be extracted from each well. Once liquid fluids have done the fracturing the CO2 can perform some degree of enhanced oil recovery.
It could potentially reduce the carbon footprint of so called dirty American and Canadian petroleum, reduce consumption of toxic fracking fluids etc. We already push natural gas, steam, nitrogen and all sorts of stuff into the ground to help get petroleum out
The question does not have enough detail to make ultimate judgments on the approach they attempted, but what is there suggests what mistakes they made.
Firstly you don't have to yel at the m SUPPORT! Well duh, that is the first thing anyone would think (including these people as well). Purchase a support contract is obvious.
Which brings me to the other point you seemed to miss completely--that this budget surplus of $20,000 had to be "spent" AND PRODUCTS/SERVICES RENDERED within the fiscal year, which was only 4 weeks or less by the time the offers went out! I think is is quite possible that making out four $5000 invoices for just a couple WEEKS of a support contract and making it look legitimate could be a challenge without some legitimate record of services or products delivered over that short period (where are the transmittals? Reports? Bills of Lading? Meeting minutes? Receipts for expenses?). To make it unsuspicious would require some degree of fabrication (inventing face documents, back-dating, etc), and then you are in murky ethical territory.
So, making a superficial post without giving even cursory thought to what was in TFA, then b!tching about the decline in the quality of discussion of others despite the lack of effort put in by yourself, I think you've been rightfully down-modded.
--too much BS.
transparency != complexity. Having relatives who worked in the DND I know that it is mostly about bureaucratic inertia at best and NOT being fair at worst.
Having to follow public tender rules designed to manage huge projects for purchasing hand tools, power cords, and other sundry items is not reasonable nor is it expected. It is done because of the culture of the organisation, and sometimes to REDUCE transparency. The rules do NOT say such illogical accounting procedures that average out costs like that are mandatory. in fact the strategy in that environment is chosen to REDUCE transparency. You sign a big huge contract then single source all under that one party and do the LEAST amount of breakdown as required by law. Sometimes it is done to hide shenanigans, other times it is because of "national security" (legitimately). Then some wag asks "wow your tools budget is huge--what does a hammer cost" but there is no accounting for individual tools, so some bean counter is assigned to pull a number out of his butt (hmmm..inventory control shows 'x' hammers added, sum('quantity')='y' and total dollars spent was 'z' so hammercost=z*x/y ... hmmm that is $20k...oh well it's a number and they wanted a number so there it is). But it isn't really--they just fill out a req form for some hammers then send it to purchasing then hammers arrive...and no money or invoices or anything passes hands until the end of a fiscal period, so that is all they have to go on.
Again, it is quite the opposite of "transparent" and "fair"--it is all about "minimum compliance"...follow the law to the letter and do no more, because the more detail is available the more questions get asked. The only thing that makes it "fair" is that the rules are the same for all (the fact the rules are stupid and unworkable for many matters not).
...because I cannot figure any other reason you would thing such a practice is "ttotally normal". It does happen, it is on the fuzzy legal line where it probably wouldn't result in legal trouble yes. However, this is FAR from "totally normal".
The spending pattern you talk about *IS* a common situation, though in my experience it is mostly what happens in public institutions or perhaps a few of the largest of corporations in departments that are "revenue sinks" rather than "revenue generators". That is because of the budget cultire. Managers are compensated and their departments staffed based on a budget handed down in a political process. Such operations are not profit driven--the goal is to reach a "zero balance". Chronic deficit spending can be politically harmful, but chronic UNDERspending makes you a target for budget cutbacks--it is perverse but that is what happens--there is no incentive for efficiency in such an operation (and is why socialised industries without private competition are notoriously bureaucratic and inefficient).
In Canada political pundits call this "March Madness" because that is the fiscal year end, when federal government offices that are in surplus spend like drunken sailors, whilst at the same time politicians grandstand and court lobbyists and so forth at the same time. Until the Great Recession started it really was madness, becasue the whole government had been operating in surplus for many years and every department tried to maximise their spending to motivate expansion of their budgets. Now with a few years of deficits they've sobered up a bit, but the motivation to spend all allocations is still there to try and defend against cutbacks.
What is NOT commonplace at all these days is a trumped up "purchase" of imaginary products or services because if the Auditor General finds such items it could (and has) become a political mess--this is exactly what happened in the "sponsorship scandal" in Canada, where the federal government earmarked many millions of dollars to campaigning against a vote in Quebec to secede from Canada. a very large portion of that money was not spent on "real" materials and services, so government officials "bought" fake marketing services--worst of all the "supppliers" of those fake services were mostly supporters of the ruling Liberal party of the day who in turn made nice donations to the party ini the following elections (essentially funneling taxpayer revenue into the political party).
Since that scandal the government has been under a microscope over questionable purchases--no matter what the scale. Presently there is a bit of a scandal over expenses filed by Senate members--and though it is literally about %1 the size of the sponsorship scandal it has been very damaging politically. Now, say that a gov't department approached you unsolicited and said "here is $5000--you don't need to do anything but send us an invoice" would it not cause you to pause? Even if they wanted nothing else what would happn if it surfaced? Would you want to be associated with an unethical scheme of this nature? What if you had donated to the ruling party in the past personally? Optics of that are terrible.
I'd have to say that I woud not take this kind of "money for nothing" for just such a reason, whether it was from a gov't department or a corporate windfall. It may not be obviously illegal but it is ethically dubious and bad optics--enough to raise red flags in an audit. I would want no part of that.
There is another problem with this as well not even related to the above. If these project maintainers get money in exchange for an invoice for any reason it cannot be a "donation" or "gift" on the books--and that has significant tax implications especially if the FOSS project is a registered foundation or simply a personal project. In such cases unless proper services can be delivered and the amount is large enough it may be less trouble financially or legally to accept a "donation" in the form of a fake invoice. And in this c