I also have seen RJ-11 used for ethernet. Believe it or not, this setup was at the same university that hosts the National Center for Supercomputing Applications!
Pardon me, but the US Armed forces do require high school as a baseline qualification. In addition, officers are required to have college and even graduate degrees. Your post does all servicepeople and veterans a great disservice.
You're thinking with too much of a product orientation. There is no reason why two divisions can't sell the exact same products. Chances are, there will be a central organization called "Development Resources" or something similar that will provide software to any one or more of the six divisions you listed above. There will also probably be a central support organization. The coding organization will be a cost center while the six marketing branches will be profit centers.
All this does is allow Microsoft to better tailor their marketing mix to different market segments.
The United States Department of Defense probably deserves the award for collecting DNA signatures from all active duty service members. What could possibly be more personal? From my understanding, federal law enforcement agencies have access to these DNA signatures and can use them in their investigations. Furthermore, I don't think that service members can have their DNA records expunged when they exit the military.
It doesn't seem like it would be that much of a stretch for public schools and hospitals to start doing the same thing.
If you read my post you'll see that I never suggested that I knew how to do all the tasks that I asked you to try (although I am familiar with quite a few of them). I did suggest that the users who you are so quick to berate do know how to do them and probably quite well.
The bad attitude you exhibit about your job would be a strike against you in any field, not just technology. Somehow, though, some technologists think they can get away with attitudes since (for the moment) their skills are in short demand. I know, I've been there. Part of this attitude also comes from the fact that for many years, MIS and IT departments were able to operate in "silos" (organizational isolation from the rest of the business functions). This is not the case any more. The silos, and in many cases the MIS/IT departments themselves, are going away. In some cases, the CIO is the only member of the department and his job is to hire consultants. "Outsourcing" is one of those "suit" buzzwords you might have to become familiar with in the near future.
You might find yourself moving up in the world more quickly if you drop the ridiculous self-aggrandizing attitude you're displaying. By definition, unless you are working in a line position, you are just part of the staff. Nothing you do *directly* affects the success or failure of the company's mission. This means that your job is to support the "real decision makers" until you decide to get another job or to start your own company. Do you think that your users don't detect the attitude you're carrying around? Fat chance! Do you know that after you've "helped" these people, they talk about how good or bad your service was? Maybe even to your boss or your department head?
This reply is not a knock on you or on the tech support community- you DO provide a vital service. You just have to have a little bit of perspective about the role you have in the organization you choose to serve. Just take a look around you sometime.
I think a lot of the suits have gotten the point that Linux is good in the right situation. They would probably disagree with you, though, on which situations were "right."
I've met some Linux advocates in the workplace who would sooner spend six months and several tens of thousand of $s to build a system on a Linux platform when a decent commercial alternative exists for $1,200. That is just bad decision making and almost cult-like behavior.
I'm all for Linux in the corporation but EVERYTHING should fall within the constraints of cost/benefit.
Ok... So you found some good exceptions. Do you honestly feel, though, that the cases you mentioned are the rule? Do you feel that most people working in those companies today would like to have the same things happen again? Is there no one in big business who does their job because they like the company, the product, and the customers?
If not, please tell me what you think it is about the world of the gainfully employed that turns otherwise normal people into sadistic evil-doers. Is radiation from the Xerox machines, perhaps? And who are "they?"
An Anonymous Coward said: > Majority of computer users in the > workplace are dumber than a beowolf > cluster of dogturds. > Pity the poor helpdesk people.
So just because someone doesn't know much about computing and operating systems, they're a moron? Why don't you step in and try to do each one of their jobs a day? Let me know when you've figured out how to balance the general ledger, prepare the capital budget, set up financing for that new plant, and develop a launch plan for that new product R&D just finished working on. Oh, and when you're done with that, put on your human resources hat and develop an executive compensation plan for the division (remember to keep incentives in mind!)
I've interviewed people who were looking for tech support jobs and consulting before. I would never hire anybody who viewed their customers (that's right, the people you support are your customers) the way you do regardless of how skilled the candidate was.
Maybe that's why you've had such a hard time finding work...
Pardon me, but to me and most other people in the US, the Military and the Department of Defense are essentially the same entity (and I'm a former military officer). You don't say that GE Capital and General Electric, Inc. are two different organizations, do you?
Regarding your second comment, as I've already stated I'm working in the field of marketing now- and I'm quite happy about it! You do have me on three other counts, though, as I have worked for different businesses as a consultant (networking, disaster recovery, and other technology specialties) and as a project manager in systems development. I have also spent time in academe getting my degrees. I don't see why you think any of the above experiences are necessarily bad things, though. Although I don't mind talking about my career, I really don't see how it's relevant to this discussion (are you going to offer me a job, perhaps?)
Yes, making and selling toothepaste is, in fact, one contribution of business. So is making and selling computers, electricity, food, houses, and cars.
Unless you're living in the woods and using a computer you built yourself, you're the fool!
You have a good point about why some Slashdot people may have had their perceptions about business tainted (Microsoft has been shady to me, Microsoft is a business, therefore Business=Shady). Others, though, hold the view out of pure ignorance.
The good thing is, I think we can make things right in the software industry. Pretty soon that full page ad that you mentioned may have a "Cool! It works with Linux" logo on it instead of Microsoft's logo. We will just have to join together, give what we can back to the effort, and proceed ethically into broader markets.
As Bill Clinton would say: "We've been practicing the politics of personal destruction too long!"
Why don't we just ammend the GPL with the following:
"Only card carrying C++ programmers who have known about Linux for at least three years and have contributed to the kernel may use this software. Also, users must have a job in software development or as unemployed students (high school or college only) to use, distribute, or interact in any way with this software."
Would this make all the paranoids happy? Imagine what it would do for Linux's popularity! Oh, Yeah! While we're at it, why don't we go to all the "suit" newspapers, television stations, and magazines and demand that they retract every positive story they have ever run about Linux or OSS? This is all great stuff that I'm sure will help us in the long run...
That's one of the funniest things I've ever heard. Once upon a time, I worked as a information systems project manager in a Fortune 100 corporation. I was, in your words, "the boss." All of the people I supervised were consultants and made at least 25% more than I did. They also made more than MY boss did.
The funniest thing, though, is that on more than one occasion I had to "help" these highly qualified, highly paid programmers with their coding.
Au contraire, my friend. The user base has, in fact, grown because of *lots and lots* of marketing and publicity. The only difference is that to date, all the marketing and publicizing has been conducted and paid for directly by users and developers. We've held expos, advertised our user groups in newspapers and on the radio, and spread the word amongst our friends, family, and coworkers. Personally, I've probably been able to bring at least 100 people to "the community" through events I helped organize (not a big number, but I'm proud to have helped anyway).
This has been marketing and publicity of the best kind (grass roots all the way, baby!). This does not have to change now that Linux has been "acknowledged." Now we'll just have a lot more money for our efforts!
Isn't this what everyone has wanted for the past four years anyway? Can we ever truly be happy?
That's a really interesting point of view but unfortunately its wrong. Yes, it's true American businesses are motivated in part by the need to build the greatest wealth for their shareholders. At the same time, though, the professional business class knows that the sale of bad products at unfair prices does not make for sustainable profits or wealth. This means that if they are to succeed as businesses, they should offer what the market (ie: you) wants at a price it is willing to pay.
Businesses that "don't care what the customer needs" are businesses that file for bankruptcy before the end of their first year of operations. They just don't survive (it's almost like evolution). If you ask any brand manager at a major company what their job really is, they will tell you something similar to the following: "my job is to deliver to the customer the best possible product at a fair price." If you hook them up to a lie detector, you will see that they are really telling you what they believe. Why do you think that many millions are spent on market research each year?
Yes, there are shady people out there in corporate America but they are the exception rather than the rule. Big business does not generally tolerate them (too much risk, for one thing). Furthermore, I still don't understand why some of the people who post here hear the word "business" and automatically think "Microsoft." That is a rather simplistic view of the world, n'est ce pas?
"Suits do not generally think long term..."- I've added this quote to a notebook I keep next to my PC. The notebook has a label on the cover that says "Inane Stereotypes I Have Read on Slashdot." I'm running out of paper, by the way...
I would counter your statement and point out that some of the most successful and admired companies in the western world have been in existence for very long periods of time. Think of Ford, Procter and Gamble, General Electric, and Wells Fargo. All four have operated in their respective industries for close to or above 100 years and continue to offer products in the same categories on which they were founded. The first three companies I listed are the #1 most respected businesses in their industries (according to Fortune magazine's "Most Admired Companies") while the last is in the top ten. To summarize, business people seem to respect those companies that exemplify long term thinking over those that don't.
If you have a problem with "short term thinking," it should probably be directed toward the technology/Internet industry and the million "dot com" businesses it has spawned. The hordes of techies running around the bay area with half-baked business plans in their back pockets and visions of IPOs dancing through their heads are as guilty as anyone for the condition you describe. Your problem is NOT, I should think, with the business world and "suits" in general.
Slashdot Mirror
I also have seen RJ-11 used for ethernet. Believe it or not, this setup was at the same university that hosts the National Center for Supercomputing Applications!
Dillon:
Pardon me, but the US Armed forces do require high school as a baseline qualification. In addition, officers are required to have college and even graduate degrees. Your post does all servicepeople and veterans a great disservice.
Write about what you know...
You're thinking with too much of a product orientation. There is no reason why two divisions can't sell the exact same products. Chances are, there will be a central organization called "Development Resources" or something similar that will provide software to any one or more of the six divisions you listed above. There will also probably be a central support organization. The coding organization will be a cost center while the six marketing branches will be profit centers.
All this does is allow Microsoft to better tailor their marketing mix to different market segments.
If general admission passes are $100, why are Linux Global Summit passes $150? I presume the extra $50 is being used to pay for speakers?
The United States Department of Defense probably deserves the award for collecting DNA signatures from all active duty service members. What could possibly be more personal? From my understanding, federal law enforcement agencies have access to these DNA signatures and can use them in their investigations. Furthermore, I don't think that service members can have their DNA records expunged when they exit the military.
It doesn't seem like it would be that much of a stretch for public schools and hospitals to start doing the same thing.
Thanks... Got to stop reading Slashdot in "flat" mode.
C'mon my man... You're going to ding me on a measly dash?
You're right. I apologize, Mr. AC (if you're listening...)
If you read my post you'll see that I never suggested that I knew how to do all the tasks that I asked you to try (although I am familiar with quite a few of them). I did suggest that the users who you are so quick to berate do know how to do them and probably quite well.
The bad attitude you exhibit about your job would be a strike against you in any field, not just technology. Somehow, though, some technologists think they can get away with attitudes since (for the moment) their skills are in short demand. I know, I've been there. Part of this attitude also comes from the fact that for many years, MIS and IT departments were able to operate in "silos" (organizational isolation from the rest of the business functions). This is not the case any more. The silos, and in many cases the MIS/IT departments themselves, are going away. In some cases, the CIO is the only member of the department and his job is to hire consultants. "Outsourcing" is one of those "suit" buzzwords you might have to become familiar with in the near future.
You might find yourself moving up in the world more quickly if you drop the ridiculous self-aggrandizing attitude you're displaying. By definition, unless you are working in a line position, you are just part of the staff. Nothing you do *directly* affects the success or failure of the company's mission. This means that your job is to support the "real decision makers" until you decide to get another job or to start your own company. Do you think that your users don't detect the attitude you're carrying around? Fat chance! Do you know that after you've "helped" these people, they talk about how good or bad your service was? Maybe even to your boss or your department head?
This reply is not a knock on you or on the tech support community- you DO provide a vital service. You just have to have a little bit of perspective about the role you have in the organization you choose to serve. Just take a look around you sometime.
Amen, Brother! Let's aim this rocket for the stars and see where we end up... All aboard!
I think a lot of the suits have gotten the point that Linux is good in the right situation. They would probably disagree with you, though, on which situations were "right."
I've met some Linux advocates in the workplace who would sooner spend six months and several tens of thousand of $s to build a system on a Linux platform when a decent commercial alternative exists for $1,200. That is just bad decision making and almost cult-like behavior.
I'm all for Linux in the corporation but EVERYTHING should fall within the constraints of cost/benefit.
At least you won't be bothered by flashy advertising any more. I hear the cigars are pretty good too...
Let me know how you like it when you like it after you've been there for about a year.
Ok... So you found some good exceptions. Do you honestly feel, though, that the cases you mentioned are the rule? Do you feel that most people working in those companies today would like to have the same things happen again? Is there no one in big business who does their job because they like the company, the product, and the customers?
If not, please tell me what you think it is about the world of the gainfully employed that turns otherwise normal people into sadistic evil-doers. Is radiation from the Xerox machines, perhaps? And who are "they?"
An Anonymous Coward said:
> Majority of computer users in the
> workplace are dumber than a beowolf
> cluster of dogturds.
> Pity the poor helpdesk people.
So just because someone doesn't know much about computing and operating systems, they're a moron? Why don't you step in and try to do each one of their jobs a day? Let me know when you've figured out how to balance the general ledger, prepare the capital budget, set up financing for that new plant, and develop a launch plan for that new product R&D just finished working on. Oh, and when you're done with that, put on your human resources hat and develop an executive compensation plan for the division (remember to keep incentives in mind!)
I've interviewed people who were looking for tech support jobs and consulting before. I would never hire anybody who viewed their customers (that's right, the people you support are your customers) the way you do regardless of how skilled the candidate was.
Maybe that's why you've had such a hard time finding work...
Pardon me, but to me and most other people in the US, the Military and the Department of Defense are essentially the same entity (and I'm a former military officer). You don't say that GE Capital and General Electric, Inc. are two different organizations, do you?
Regarding your second comment, as I've already stated I'm working in the field of marketing now- and I'm quite happy about it! You do have me on three other counts, though, as I have worked for different businesses as a consultant (networking, disaster recovery, and other technology specialties) and as a project manager in systems development. I have also spent time in academe getting my degrees. I don't see why you think any of the above experiences are necessarily bad things, though. Although I don't mind talking about my career, I really don't see how it's relevant to this discussion (are you going to offer me a job, perhaps?)
Ok... We'll exclude the C++ programmers too, then! Will Perl hackers be allowed in? What about PHP3 people?
Actually, the guy never said he was a Republican... (Neither am I, by the way- Libertarianism is the one true way!)
And they're "suits" too (green camouflage suits, anyway)...
Yes, making and selling toothepaste is, in fact, one contribution of business. So is making and selling computers, electricity, food, houses, and cars.
Unless you're living in the woods and using a computer you built yourself, you're the fool!
You have a good point about why some Slashdot people may have had their perceptions about business tainted (Microsoft has been shady to me, Microsoft is a business, therefore Business=Shady). Others, though, hold the view out of pure ignorance.
The good thing is, I think we can make things right in the software industry. Pretty soon that full page ad that you mentioned may have a "Cool! It works with Linux" logo on it instead of Microsoft's logo. We will just have to join together, give what we can back to the effort, and proceed ethically into broader markets.
As Bill Clinton would say: "We've been practicing the politics of personal destruction too long!"
Why don't we just ammend the GPL with the following:
"Only card carrying C++ programmers who have known about Linux for at least three years and have contributed to the kernel may use this software. Also, users must have a job in software development or as unemployed students (high school or college only) to use, distribute, or interact in any way with this software."
Would this make all the paranoids happy? Imagine what it would do for Linux's popularity! Oh, Yeah! While we're at it, why don't we go to all the "suit" newspapers, television stations, and magazines and demand that they retract every positive story they have ever run about Linux or OSS? This is all great stuff that I'm sure will help us in the long run...
That's one of the funniest things I've ever heard. Once upon a time, I worked as a information systems project manager in a Fortune 100 corporation. I was, in your words, "the boss." All of the people I supervised were consultants and made at least 25% more than I did. They also made more than MY boss did.
The funniest thing, though, is that on more than one occasion I had to "help" these highly qualified, highly paid programmers with their coding.
Au contraire, my friend. The user base has, in fact, grown because of *lots and lots* of marketing and publicity. The only difference is that to date, all the marketing and publicizing has been conducted and paid for directly by users and developers. We've held expos, advertised our user groups in newspapers and on the radio, and spread the word amongst our friends, family, and coworkers. Personally, I've probably been able to bring at least 100 people to "the community" through events I helped organize (not a big number, but I'm proud to have helped anyway).
This has been marketing and publicity of the best kind (grass roots all the way, baby!). This does not have to change now that Linux has been "acknowledged." Now we'll just have a lot more money for our efforts!
Isn't this what everyone has wanted for the past four years anyway? Can we ever truly be happy?
That's a really interesting point of view but unfortunately its wrong. Yes, it's true American businesses are motivated in part by the need to build the greatest wealth for their shareholders. At the same time, though, the professional business class knows that the sale of bad products at unfair prices does not make for sustainable profits or wealth. This means that if they are to succeed as businesses, they should offer what the market (ie: you) wants at a price it is willing to pay.
Businesses that "don't care what the customer needs" are businesses that file for bankruptcy before the end of their first year of operations. They just don't survive (it's almost like evolution). If you ask any brand manager at a major company what their job really is, they will tell you something similar to the following: "my job is to deliver to the customer the best possible product at a fair price." If you hook them up to a lie detector, you will see that they are really telling you what they believe. Why do you think that many millions are spent on market research each year?
Yes, there are shady people out there in corporate America but they are the exception rather than the rule. Big business does not generally tolerate them (too much risk, for one thing). Furthermore, I still don't understand why some of the people who post here hear the word "business" and automatically think "Microsoft." That is a rather simplistic view of the world, n'est ce pas?
"Suits do not generally think long term..."- I've added this quote to a notebook I keep next to my PC. The notebook has a label on the cover that says "Inane Stereotypes I Have Read on Slashdot." I'm running out of paper, by the way...
I would counter your statement and point out that some of the most successful and admired companies in the western world have been in existence for very long periods of time. Think of Ford, Procter and Gamble, General Electric, and Wells Fargo. All four have operated in their respective industries for close to or above 100 years and continue to offer products in the same categories on which they were founded. The first three companies I listed are the #1 most respected businesses in their industries (according to Fortune magazine's "Most Admired Companies") while the last is in the top ten. To summarize, business people seem to respect those companies that exemplify long term thinking over those that don't.
If you have a problem with "short term thinking," it should probably be directed toward the technology/Internet industry and the million "dot com" businesses it has spawned. The hordes of techies running around the bay area with half-baked business plans in their back pockets and visions of IPOs dancing through their heads are as guilty as anyone for the condition you describe. Your problem is NOT, I should think, with the business world and "suits" in general.