Judge Jackson has proven that he is no fool. He knows very well that Linux is, in fact, a very big *potential* competitor to Microsoft.
And that's why he *had* to play down Linux's influence. If he had admitted the truth, it would have weakened his position (that MS is a monopoly), and perhaps left some "wiggle room" for MS on appeal. "See! Even the *judge* admits that Linux is a threat! How can poor widdle old warm-and-fuzzy Microsoft be a monopoly if we have real competition?"
So I'm not wondering at all about why he *appeared* to disregard the Linux angle. If he had admitted it, he would have given strength to MS's case. And if you read his wording very carefully, you'll see that he doesn't come even close to saying "Linux means nothing and will never amount to anything." He uses a lot of phrases like "TO DATE..[developers haven't shown as much interest]", and "BY ITSELF [Linux won't win the war". Pay close attention to his modifiers and you'll see that he is just basically saying that "Linux isn't quite there YET, and probably won't be a serious competitor to MS *on its own*."
So Jackson is smart enough to see where Linux will be in the future. But since, despite its success, it still isn't cracking seriously into MS's market share, he probably figured that it was pointless to give them ammunition.
Quicken is the single most-requested app for a Linux port. Intuit could make a bundle with a port. However, if their pointy-haired types don't wanna do it, that's their business.
What I can't understand is why some Loki-like company doesn't simply go to Intuit and say "millions of Linux users want Quicken. License the source code to us, we'll port it, and you'll make money off every copy sold and not have risked a dime."
Anyone want to start a "Loki for business apps" company with me?:)
This means nothing. They know damn well that 98% of their users will remain completely unaware to the whole issue, and of tose who find out about it, few will bother to download and install a patch.
This kind fo thing has becoem Standard Operating Procedure for companies these days: worry about privacy only if you get caught, then throw a bone to all the "privacy freaks".
There's tons of financial incentive to spy on users and have crappy privacy policies. There's pretty much zero incentive to worry about it. Their attitude is "just throw it in there, probably no one will ever find out about it, and if they do, we throw a patch to the weirdos and continue gathering our information from the vast majority of people who will never even be aware of the issue."
Companies are never punished at all for privacy invasions, so why should they really care?
All these announcements about PC vendors pre-installing Linux and guaranteeing that their machiens will run Linux is not only great news because it means more linux users overall, but also because it will definitely mean more and better hardware support by OEMs, and more releasing of hardware specs and driver source.
Think about it: if major manufacturers like Compaq and Dell are going to be supporting Linux, they will not want to have to build two different kinds of machines using two different kinds of components: they are going to want their vendors to supply components that are Linux-compatible so that tehy only have to stock one kind of component, and to reduce their support costs. Soon enough, component vendors won't be able to ignore Linux support as if it didn't matter, because their major high-volume customers will be demanding it, not just end users. Compaq will be saying "look, Mr. network-card-vendor, we want Linux support, and we want *good* Linux support, or else we'll go find someone whose product *does* have it."
And that will be a happy time, as hardware manufacturers scramble not only to rtelease their specs, but actively work with the Linux community to make sure tehir drivers are solid.
Damn, talk about a pessimist! The game has only just been announced, and already you're whining about "how bad it will be". Get a life, and give the thing a chance!
The original NWN had sucky graphics compared to today's, nowhere near as many spells, monsters, or other cool options. It was a *great* game for the time, but the new one would have to be one hideous monstrosity to not whup ass.
As for how big the game is, I fail to see what that has to do with anything. Smaller != better. DOS is a smaller OS than Linux, does that mean it's better?
Oh, that's just utter nonsense. People who complain about the cost of NASA are simply displaying their complete ignorance of the US Federal Budget, of which NASA comprises far less than 1%. NASA's total funding for a year is about the same as ONE stealth bomber.
You want to "improve the US"? Find someplace to cut *real* money, not the microscopic amount of chump change that gets spent on useful things like NASA.
People who go around whining about their delusions that NASA costs a lot are simply uneducated morons.
I, and many, many, many other people, used Quake II right out of the box with no problems at all. I didn't even know there were patches until I wanted to start playing some of the mods. So your comment about it being 'a useless piece of crap' is just ignorance. You're one of those dumb people who assumes "it didn't work for me, therefore it didn't work for anyone else, therefore it's a piece of crap."
I have to say this development makes me very worried. My first thought was "Wait a minute, it isn't April 1 already!"
No, I'm certainly not saying "Slashdot will be the next MS" or any such nonsense. Like the all others, I'd like to thank Rob and Hemos for all their hard work. I can most certainly understand their desire to work less, get paid for it, and concentrate on doing the things they like doing. They deserve it. But I don't think congratulations are in order because I don't think it was the best decision. I certainly hope very much that everything turns out OK and my worries turn out to be unfounded, but history is on my side.
I mean, c'mon - how many times have we heard those fateful words "don't worry, *these* suits are OK, and we're guaranteed to have complete creative control." Having "creative control" in your a contract is worthless, as is a seat on the board. Rob can be voted *off* the board anytime the rest of the board members feel like it, and as for contracts - well, who has more money to fight a protracted legal battle, Rob or Andover.net?
I've seen this happen time and time again: bright, cool, creative guys start something neat. It explodes in popularity. Founders get annoyed at all the ancillary stuff and just want to go back to writing code. Founders sell out to suits who *promise*, on their mothers graves, with tears of sincerity in their eyes, that said founders will have Complete Creative Control for as long as the trees grow and the rivers run. And then, two years later, there is a bitter and acrimonious separation accompanied by all sorts of litigation.
Rob, what exactly did you *get* from this deal? A job? You could have gotten one anywhere, but it seems to me that it's all you walked away with. You could have made enough money to retire on and been *actually* guaranteed control. Essentially you took a brand worth a buttload of cash and gave it to someone else for the priveledge of working for them. You didn't even sell out, you just... gave it away? Why give away something so valauable for nothing?
Folks, if you're in this situation, don't EVER work under suits in ANY way. There are no "good suits". Start your own company, and make sure the suits work for *you*. Always. Kick the marketdroids in the ass on a regular basis and remind everyone who runs the show. Put the fear of GAWD into them once in a while and you can *still* spend most of your time coding and yet not have to worry about control, because you have it all. Because suits are sneakier and far more devious than hackers, with their generally trusting natures, are. Suits just smile like that because they're anticipating the delicious look on your face when you realze you have squat, a look like the Indigenous Americans must have had when they realized they sold Manhattan for a bunch of beads.
Oh, it will be OK at first. But here's a potential worst-case scenario: soon enough they will want a return on their (really very small) investment. They will ask you to put in just one more banner ad. Oh, and collect some marketing stats with cookies. And, could you actually run an ad on the sidebar, too? You don't really need all those slashbozes, do ya, Rob 'ol pal? And, oh, we just signed a partnership with foobar.com, could you put a link to them on every page? That's a good boy. What's that? Um, yeah, we were peeking into the registered user database, calm down, it's no big deal. Hmm? You don't want to go along with all this? Guaranteed Creative Control, you say? Bahahaha! Oh, excuse us, we didn't mean to laugh in your face. Well, creative control is up to the courts to decide, isn't it? At last count we had 4 attourneys on retainer, how many did you say you have again? What? A seat on the board? Oh, the board voted you out yesterday, didn't we tell you? Oops, sorry. You're pissed off? You're leaving? Oh, well, too bad, it was nice knowing you, here's your two weeks severance.
So, Rob, Hemos, best of luck. I mean it. But I'm afraid you'll need it, too.
Never trust a suit that says he understands geeks. If he actually did, he wouldn't be a suit.
Doug Linder dglinder@DEV-NULL-THIS-BITario.ch
Re:HR people use Word - deal with it
on
Feature:Geek Jobs
·
· Score: 1
Oh, nonsense. 95% of all people at agencies are the morons the author describes. I encounter this situation everytime I change jobs, which is often. And I *do* have a copy of Word, which I never use - least of all to do a headhunter's work for him. You know what I tell the headhunter-droids? Simple: screw you. Do it yourself. Thats' *your* job.
The issue is how you view the employment agencies. Some people I know have (IMO) a very skewed view of the role of these agencies. They actually assign them some importance, or at least some kind of respect. Their attitudes range from fearful ("Oh, PLEASE, Mr. Pointy-Haired Agency Person, PLEASE look at my resume and get me a job, I'll send it in Chinese CP/M format if you want!") to resigned ("Oh, well, whatever, I'll send it in their stupid format, grumble). Both are silly, as silly as going into an auto showroom and begging them to sell you a car.
I think these folks have the relationship between "us" and "them" (the agencies) all backwards. *They* need *us* to make a living, since they actually have no real skills and must parasite off those who do. Agencies are people *we* (or potential employers) hire, not people we need to kowtow to. It sickens me when someone goes groveling to an agency for a job. They are effectively our employees who we have hired to find us jobs, not the other way around.
*Some* agencies are OK. *Some* of them have clueful people who know what they're doing. But *most* don't. For the most part, they are a bunch of do-nothing vampires who have found a niche they are exploiting today - only because no one has fully realized that this business is yet another one that's directly in the way of the oncoming Internet bulldozer. There's no more need for headhunters these days than there is for record companies.
*They* should be begging *us* for our business. After all, they have a pretty good racket, getting a hefty percentage of a large salary for doing pretty much no more than hooking up employers and employees and doing some paperwork. After the initial contact is made, they do essentially zero for their cut. And they get it from both sides: they charge the employer for their services, and they (sometimes) take a nice chunk of your paycheck, depending on the contract. If they don't, you can be sure they are screwing the employer for some outrageous fee.
And they do need us more than we need them - they just don't like to admit it. Everyone knows employment agencies engage in "fishing expeditions", putting ads in papers and online for jobs which sound great but are entirely fictitious, just so they can collect our names, resumes, phone numbers, salary ranges, and so on. They are worse than spammers, making us take our valuable time to do their market research for them for free.
95% of all headhunter/employment agencies are S-C-U-M *SCUM*. Treat them that way. I know, a lot of people will respond saying I'm immature, or incorrect, or mistaken, or whatever. But that's not the case. I'm right. They are simply taking advantage of our cultural conditioning to act as if anyone who has a job we might want is some kind of super-authority figure whom we must kneel before. And it's just not that way. If they want their fancy suits and Rolex watches, they need to make *us* happy, not the other way around.
So my advice is to not deal with these bastards at all, if possible. If it isn't possible, don't bend over for them. Tell them you'll send your resume in whatever damn format you want, and it's *their* responsibility to convert it if they choose. You don't have to be rude or abusive, but be firm and make clear from the beginning what the relationship is - YOU, an experienced IT person, are a rare and valuable commodity. THEY - a dime-a-dozen, rinky-dink operation that survives by leeching onto those who do actual work - are entirely disposable to you. If you don't like one, just pick up the phone book and choose any one of the 100 other agencies. Again, you don't have to be rude or obnoxious, just be firm and confident.
I'm a UNIX sysadmin. I'm looking for all-UNIX jobs. I only apply for all-UNIX jobs. I don't use M$ for anything other than games. I tell employment agencies and potential employers: "Don't ask me to do Microsoft. I won't. Period. That's the way I want it, that's the way I like it, and that's the way it's going to be." Sometimes people laugh at me and call me a stubborn dinosaur, that I will be "crushed by NT". Sometimes people look down their noses at me as if I'm am immature or naive child. Fine with me. I've got ten years experience, and I laugh right back at them because I have even more job offers than ever, people beating down my door, and huge salary increases. Not only does the UNIX job market not seem to be drying up, it seems to be expanding rapidly. All those people who are saying "UNIX will be crushed by NT" are the ones living in a dream world.
And you know what? Since I went to my "NO Microsoft at all!" policy, my stress level at works has gone down by at least 50%. IT is a much better career when there's no MS involved at all. And maybe then employers will stop saying "there aren't enough UNIX people!". Seriously, try this. You will find that not only does it not significantly decrease your job propspects (assuming you do UNIX for a living), but you will enjoy the jobs you get a lot more.
Soon, the job market will be like any other commodity market. It will be completely online, and "buyers" and "sellers" can contact each other diretly, and use will be ubiquitious enough so that you don't need agencies at all. Until then, keep headhunters in their place, make sure they know that you understand the true nature of the relationship between you, and send those resumes in plain ASCII format. Make *them* do some work for once, and the next time you get a call or email saying "wee need your resume in format", just say "Earn your fees for one and do it yourselves, you lazy bastards!"
Bob, I'm sure you're getting a ton of flames about your column. While I certainly disagree with you, I won't call you names. At least I know that you know something about computers, unlike so many other folks in the media.
That being said, I am sorely disappointed by your column. It has absolutely zero content. If you want to bash Linux, fine, bash away. But from you, I expect a lot more. I expect specific technical issues, not vague mumblings about communism. Simply saying "Linux sucks because it's old and because some of the people who work on it have odd political leanings" is about as weak an argument as it gets.
The argument "it's bad because it's old" is as silly as "it's better because it's new". Quite frankly, I'd rather run a company based on boring old stable and time-tested software rather than an OS which isn't even out of diapers yet, and contains bad implementations of every gee-whiz feature Bill gates could come up with to expand his empire. So your argument that "Linux is bad because UNIX is old" just amuses me.
And in the same way, your assertion that "Linux is bad because the programmers are weird" is pretty silly, as well. I don't care whether the programmers think the moon is made of green cheese. I only care how good the code is. And the two have zero to do with each other.
Finally, as for "Win2K" trouncing Linux, that one makes me laugh, but all we can do is wait and see.
I've read your piece 3 times, combing it for any small bit of fact, detail, or anything solid. I find nothing. This piece could have been written by my 14-year-old cousin. He also things that anything old is bad, and that weird people suck. C'mon, Bob. You're a computer professional and have a lot more technical knowledge. Is *this* the best you can do? Puh-lease. I see better arguments against Linux from pointy-haired bosses. At least *they* sometimes I have - or had - a lot more respect for you.
I think it's important that we all take time to send some "thank you" email to Nvidia for this. We don't want to be seen as ungrateful complainers who never do anything but write flames. I suggest that when a company makes a good move like this, we make sure that they know we noticed, we cared, and we will patronize them with our business. A little goodwill goes a long way, and what comes around, goes around, and soon.
Writing to the guy who pushed it through is nice, certainly, and he deserves a lot of credit, but I also think we should write the PR people, the sales people, and other PHB types.
Along those lines, does anyone know if any online stores will have it? Where can I get it 1) Online and 2) that ships internationally? I usually use Cyberian Outpost but I doubt they will carry it. Of course I will write to ask them to carry it and BFRIS.
One thing we all have to do is PESTER (politely!) stores both offline and online to carry it so they know there is a demand. I am tired of hearing "What's Linux?" or "Oh, we don't get any demand for Linux products".
If anyone knows of an pline store that will carry CTP and ships internationally,please drop me a line at dglinder@datacomm.DEV-NULL-THIS-BIT.ch.
The result of this is a no-brainer to predict: most states will enact taxes, but a few won't. Internet-based businesses will all flock there. They are happy because they get more business from no sales tax, and the states is happy because although they lose sales tax they make more business tax and personal income tax. This is not possible with retail stores, so the "flight" effect has been less pronounced.
Also, as has been mentioned, many places will simply go offshore.
Slashdot Mirror
Judge Jackson has proven that he is no fool. He knows very well that Linux is, in fact, a very big *potential* competitor to Microsoft.
And that's why he *had* to play down Linux's influence. If he had admitted the truth, it would have weakened his position (that MS is a monopoly), and perhaps left some "wiggle room" for MS on appeal. "See! Even the *judge* admits that Linux is a threat! How can poor widdle old warm-and-fuzzy Microsoft be a monopoly if we have real competition?"
So I'm not wondering at all about why he *appeared* to disregard the Linux angle. If he had admitted it, he would have given strength to MS's case. And if you read his wording very carefully, you'll see that he doesn't come even close to saying "Linux means nothing and will never amount to anything." He uses a lot of phrases like "TO DATE..[developers haven't shown as much interest]", and "BY ITSELF [Linux won't win the war". Pay close attention to his modifiers and you'll see that he is just basically saying that "Linux isn't quite there YET, and probably won't be a serious competitor to MS *on its own*."
So Jackson is smart enough to see where Linux will be in the future. But since, despite its success, it still isn't cracking seriously into MS's market share, he probably figured that it was pointless to give them ammunition.
Quicken is the single most-requested app for a Linux port. Intuit could make a bundle with a port. However, if their pointy-haired types don't wanna do it, that's their business.
:)
What I can't understand is why some Loki-like company doesn't simply go to Intuit and say "millions of Linux users want Quicken. License the source code to us, we'll port it, and you'll make money off every copy sold and not have risked a dime."
Anyone want to start a "Loki for business apps" company with me?
This means nothing. They know damn well that 98% of their users will remain completely unaware to the whole issue, and of tose who find out about it, few will bother to download and install a patch.
This kind fo thing has becoem Standard Operating Procedure for companies these days: worry about privacy only if you get caught, then throw a bone to all the "privacy freaks".
There's tons of financial incentive to spy on users and have crappy privacy policies. There's pretty much zero incentive to worry about it. Their attitude is "just throw it in there, probably no one will ever find out about it, and if they do, we throw a patch to the weirdos and continue gathering our information from the vast majority of people who will never even be aware of the issue."
Companies are never punished at all for privacy invasions, so why should they really care?
All these announcements about PC vendors pre-installing Linux and guaranteeing that their machiens will run Linux is not only great news because it means more linux users overall, but also because it will definitely mean more and better hardware support by OEMs, and more releasing of hardware specs and driver source.
Think about it: if major manufacturers like Compaq and Dell are going to be supporting Linux, they will not want to have to build two different kinds of machines using two different kinds of components: they are going to want their vendors to supply components that are Linux-compatible so that tehy only have to stock one kind of component, and to reduce their support costs. Soon enough, component vendors won't be able to ignore Linux support as if it didn't matter, because their major high-volume customers will be demanding it, not just end users. Compaq will be saying "look, Mr. network-card-vendor, we want Linux support, and we want *good* Linux support, or else we'll go find someone whose product *does* have it."
And that will be a happy time, as hardware manufacturers scramble not only to rtelease their specs, but actively work with the Linux community to make sure tehir drivers are solid.
Damn, talk about a pessimist! The game has only just been announced, and already you're whining about "how bad it will be". Get a life, and give the thing a chance!
The original NWN had sucky graphics compared to today's, nowhere near as many spells, monsters, or other cool options. It was a *great* game for the time, but the new one would have to be one hideous monstrosity to not whup ass.
As for how big the game is, I fail to see what that has to do with anything. Smaller != better. DOS is a smaller OS than Linux, does that mean it's better?
Geez...
Oh, that's just utter nonsense. People who complain about the cost of NASA are simply displaying their complete ignorance of the US Federal Budget, of which NASA comprises far less than 1%. NASA's total funding for a year is about the same as ONE stealth bomber.
You want to "improve the US"? Find someplace to cut *real* money, not the microscopic amount of chump change that gets spent on useful things like NASA.
People who go around whining about their delusions that NASA costs a lot are simply uneducated morons.
I, and many, many, many other people, used Quake II right out of the box with no problems at all. I didn't even know there were patches until I wanted to start playing some of the mods. So your comment about it being 'a useless piece of crap' is just ignorance. You're one of those dumb people who assumes "it didn't work for me, therefore it didn't work for anyone else, therefore it's a piece of crap."
I have to say this development makes me very worried. My first thought was "Wait a minute, it isn't April 1 already!"
No, I'm certainly not saying "Slashdot will be the next MS" or any such nonsense. Like the all others, I'd like to thank Rob and Hemos for all their hard work. I can most certainly understand their desire to work less, get paid for it, and concentrate on doing the things they like doing. They deserve it. But I don't think congratulations are in order because I don't think it was the best decision. I certainly hope very much that everything turns out OK and my worries turn out to be unfounded, but history is on my side.
I mean, c'mon - how many times have we heard those fateful words "don't worry, *these* suits are OK, and we're guaranteed to have complete creative control." Having "creative control" in your a contract is worthless, as is a seat on the board. Rob can be voted *off* the board anytime the rest of the board members feel like it, and as for contracts - well, who has more money to fight a protracted legal battle, Rob or Andover.net?
I've seen this happen time and time again: bright, cool, creative guys start something neat. It explodes in popularity. Founders get annoyed at all the ancillary stuff and just want to go back to writing code. Founders sell out to suits who *promise*, on their mothers graves, with tears of sincerity in their eyes, that said founders will have Complete Creative Control for as long as the trees grow and the rivers run. And then, two years later, there is a bitter and acrimonious separation accompanied by all sorts of litigation.
Rob, what exactly did you *get* from this deal? A job? You could have gotten one anywhere, but it seems to me that it's all you walked away with. You could have made enough money to retire on and been *actually* guaranteed control. Essentially you took a brand worth a buttload of cash and gave it to someone else for the priveledge of working for them. You didn't even sell out, you just... gave it away? Why give away something so valauable for nothing?
Folks, if you're in this situation, don't EVER work under suits in ANY way. There are no "good suits". Start your own company, and make sure the suits work for *you*. Always. Kick the marketdroids in the ass on a regular basis and remind everyone who runs the show. Put the fear of GAWD into them once in a while and you can *still* spend most of your time coding and yet not have to worry about control, because you have it all. Because suits are sneakier and far more devious than hackers, with their generally trusting natures, are. Suits just smile like that because they're anticipating the delicious look on your face when you realze you have squat, a look like the Indigenous Americans must have had when they realized they sold Manhattan for a bunch of beads.
Oh, it will be OK at first. But here's a potential worst-case scenario: soon enough they will want a return on their (really very small) investment. They will ask you to put in just one more banner ad. Oh, and collect some marketing stats with cookies. And, could you actually run an ad on the sidebar, too? You don't really need all those slashbozes, do ya, Rob 'ol pal? And, oh, we just signed a partnership with foobar.com, could you put a link to them on every page? That's a good boy. What's that? Um, yeah, we were peeking into the registered user database, calm down, it's no big deal. Hmm? You don't want to go along with all this? Guaranteed Creative Control, you say? Bahahaha! Oh, excuse us, we didn't mean to laugh in your face. Well, creative control is up to the courts to decide, isn't it? At last count we had 4 attourneys on retainer, how many did you say you have again? What? A seat on the board? Oh, the board voted you out yesterday, didn't we tell you? Oops, sorry. You're pissed off? You're leaving? Oh, well, too bad, it was nice knowing you, here's your two weeks severance.
So, Rob, Hemos, best of luck. I mean it. But I'm afraid you'll need it, too.
Never trust a suit that says he understands geeks. If he actually did, he wouldn't be a suit.
Doug Linder
dglinder@DEV-NULL-THIS-BITario.ch
Oh, nonsense. 95% of all people at agencies are the morons the author describes. I encounter this situation everytime I change jobs, which is often. And I *do* have a copy of Word, which I never use - least of all to do a headhunter's work for him. You know what I tell the headhunter-droids? Simple: screw you. Do it yourself. Thats' *your* job.
The issue is how you view the employment agencies. Some people I know have (IMO) a very skewed view of the role of these agencies. They actually assign them some importance, or at least some kind of respect. Their attitudes range from fearful ("Oh, PLEASE, Mr. Pointy-Haired Agency Person, PLEASE look at my resume and get me a job, I'll send it in Chinese CP/M format if you want!") to resigned ("Oh, well, whatever, I'll send it in their stupid format, grumble). Both are silly, as silly as going into an auto showroom and begging them to sell you a car.
I think these folks have the relationship between "us" and "them" (the agencies) all backwards. *They* need *us* to make a living, since they actually have no real skills and must parasite off those who do. Agencies are people *we* (or potential employers) hire, not people we need to kowtow to. It sickens me when someone goes groveling to an agency for a job. They are effectively our employees who we have hired to find us jobs, not the other way around.
*Some* agencies are OK. *Some* of them have clueful people who know what they're doing. But *most* don't. For the most part, they are a bunch of do-nothing vampires who have found a niche they are exploiting today - only because no one has fully realized that this business is yet another one that's directly in the way of the oncoming Internet bulldozer. There's no more need for headhunters these days than there is for record companies.
*They* should be begging *us* for our business. After all, they have a pretty good racket, getting a hefty percentage of a large salary for doing pretty much no more than hooking up employers and employees and doing some paperwork. After the initial contact is made, they do essentially zero for their cut. And they get it from both sides: they charge the employer for their services, and they (sometimes) take a nice chunk of your paycheck, depending on the contract. If they don't, you can be sure they are screwing the employer for some outrageous fee.
And they do need us more than we need them - they just don't like to admit it. Everyone knows employment agencies engage in "fishing expeditions", putting ads in papers and online for jobs which sound great but are entirely fictitious, just so they can collect our names, resumes, phone numbers, salary ranges, and so on. They are worse than spammers, making us take our valuable time to do their market research for them for free.
95% of all headhunter/employment agencies are S-C-U-M *SCUM*. Treat them that way. I know, a lot of people will respond saying I'm immature, or incorrect, or mistaken, or whatever. But that's not the case. I'm right. They are simply taking advantage of our cultural conditioning to act as if anyone who has a job we might want is some kind of super-authority figure whom we must kneel before. And it's just not that way. If they want their fancy suits and Rolex watches, they need to make *us* happy, not the other way around.
So my advice is to not deal with these bastards at all, if possible. If it isn't possible, don't bend over for them. Tell them you'll send your resume in whatever damn format you want, and it's *their* responsibility to convert it if they choose. You don't have to be rude or abusive, but be firm and make clear from the beginning what the relationship is - YOU, an experienced IT person, are a rare and valuable commodity. THEY - a dime-a-dozen, rinky-dink operation that survives by leeching onto those who do actual work - are entirely disposable to you. If you don't like one, just pick up the phone book and choose any one of the 100 other agencies. Again, you don't have to be rude or obnoxious, just be firm and confident.
I'm a UNIX sysadmin. I'm looking for all-UNIX jobs. I only apply for all-UNIX jobs. I don't use M$ for anything other than games. I tell employment agencies and potential employers: "Don't ask me to do Microsoft. I won't. Period. That's the way I want it, that's the way I like it, and that's the way it's going to be." Sometimes people laugh at me and call me a stubborn dinosaur, that I will be "crushed by NT". Sometimes people look down their noses at me as if I'm am immature or naive child. Fine with me. I've got ten years experience, and I laugh right back at them because I have even more job offers than ever, people beating down my door, and huge salary increases. Not only does the UNIX job market not seem to be drying up, it seems to be expanding rapidly. All those people who are saying "UNIX will be crushed by NT" are the ones living in a dream world.
And you know what? Since I went to my "NO Microsoft at all!" policy, my stress level at works has gone down by at least 50%. IT is a much better career when there's no MS involved at all. And maybe then employers will stop saying "there aren't enough UNIX people!". Seriously, try this. You will find that not only does it not significantly decrease your job propspects (assuming you do UNIX for a living), but you will enjoy the jobs you get a lot more.
Soon, the job market will be like any other commodity market. It will be completely online, and "buyers" and "sellers" can contact each other diretly, and use will be ubiquitious enough so that you don't need agencies at all. Until then, keep headhunters in their place, make sure they know that you understand the true nature of the relationship between you, and send those resumes in plain ASCII format. Make *them* do some work for once, and the next time you get a call or email saying "wee need your resume in format", just say "Earn your fees for one and do it yourselves, you lazy bastards!"
Bob, I'm sure you're getting a ton of flames about your column. While I certainly disagree with you, I won't call you names. At least I know that you know something about computers, unlike so many other folks in the media.
That being said, I am sorely disappointed by your column. It has absolutely zero content. If you want to bash Linux, fine, bash away. But from you, I expect a lot more. I expect specific technical issues, not vague mumblings about communism. Simply saying "Linux sucks because it's old and because some of the people who work on it have odd
political leanings" is about as weak an argument as it gets.
The argument "it's bad because it's old" is as silly as "it's better because it's new". Quite frankly, I'd rather run a company based on boring old stable and time-tested software rather than an OS which isn't even out of diapers yet, and contains bad implementations of every gee-whiz feature Bill gates could come up with to expand his empire. So your argument that "Linux is bad because UNIX is old" just amuses me.
And in the same way, your assertion that "Linux is bad because the programmers are weird" is pretty silly, as well. I don't care whether the programmers think the moon is made of green cheese. I only care how good the code is. And the two have zero to do with each other.
Finally, as for "Win2K" trouncing Linux, that one makes me laugh, but all we can do is wait and see.
I've read your piece 3 times, combing it for any small bit of fact, detail, or anything solid. I find nothing. This piece could have been written by my 14-year-old cousin. He also things that anything old is bad, and that weird people suck. C'mon, Bob. You're a computer professional and have a lot more technical knowledge. Is *this* the best you can do? Puh-lease. I see better arguments against Linux from pointy-haired bosses. At least *they* sometimes I have - or had - a lot more respect for you.
I think it's important that we all take time to send some "thank you" email to Nvidia for this. We don't want to be seen as ungrateful complainers who never do anything but write flames. I suggest that when a company makes a good move like this, we make sure that they know we noticed, we cared, and we will patronize them with our business. A little goodwill goes a long way, and what comes around, goes around, and soon.
Writing to the guy who pushed it through is nice, certainly, and he deserves a lot of credit, but I also think we should write the PR people, the sales people, and other PHB types.
Doug Linder
public@ario.ch
Along those lines, does anyone know if any online stores will have it? Where can I get it 1) Online and 2) that ships internationally? I usually use Cyberian Outpost but I doubt they will carry it. Of course I will write to ask them to carry it and BFRIS.
One thing we all have to do is PESTER (politely!) stores both offline and online to carry it so they know there is a demand. I am tired of hearing "What's Linux?" or "Oh, we don't get any demand for Linux products".
If anyone knows of an pline store that will carry CTP and ships internationally,please drop me a line at dglinder@datacomm.DEV-NULL-THIS-BIT.ch.
Thanks!
The result of this is a no-brainer to predict: most states will enact taxes, but a few won't. Internet-based businesses will all flock there. They are happy because they get more business from no sales tax, and the states is happy because although they lose sales tax they make more business tax and personal income tax. This is not possible with retail stores, so the "flight" effect has been less pronounced.
Also, as has been mentioned, many places will simply go offshore.