Mozilla Mail/Minotaur/Thunderbird has LDAP support, and the Mozilla LDAP SDK supports write access, so it might actually work. I have used Mozilla Mail as my primary email client since April of 2000 (M15 or so) but not with LDAP. Try it, it just might work.
Colic is basically any unrecognized source of discomfort that causes a baby to cry. If doctors can't find a cause, it gets labeled as colic. Zantac might help some. Mylicon others. We tried them all.
Our middle one had it in the late afternoon. From the time she was 2 months old until 6 months, from 2pm until 5 or 6pm (just about the time I got home from work) she would scream. Just scream at the top of her lungs. Not exactly a pain cry, and not exactly angry, but definitely a "something is not right in the universe and you need to fix it NOW!" cry. When it ended each day, it was just over, and she was back with us like nothing ever happened. And then she "grew out of it" and it just stopped.
Who knows? Every baby is a person, and no two are the same. Be ready to encounter things that can't be analyzed, explained or reverse-engineered.
Actually, I kinda sorta remember seeing a quote from this interview back around the time it supposedly hapepned, in (maybe) Dr Dobb's. The one about bug fixes being the stupidest reason for new versions. Of course, that's what service packs are for.
Anyway, from a fresh reading, this little gem jumps out:
Sit in and listen to Win 95 calls, sit in and listen to Word calls, and wait, just wait for weeks and weeks for someone to call in and say "Oh, I found a bug in this thing"
The reason for this is that, even back in 1995, only chumps actually try to call Microsoft. Their "it's not a bug, it's feature" reputation was strong established even back then.
How many programmers does it take to change a lightbulb?
None : That's a hardware problem.
Q: How does Bill Gates change a light bulb? A: He doesn't. He just declares darkness to be the industry standard.
This one dates back to Windows 3.1 with its "cooperative" multi-tasking. One app in an infinite loop could hang the whole system. SO rather than admit that Windows did not support preemptive multitasking, Microsoft layed on the spin control saying that OS/2, Unix and were not "real-time". This sort of lead into the whole multi-media PC thing with the assumption that the OS needed to be realtime to do anything with sound or video.
Generally these same people have no action items, are the least proactive,
You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
"Active" is the opposite of "reactive". "Proactive" has nothing to do with active/reactive. The original definition had to do with learning, and the fact that information recieved earlier tends to pre-empt information recieved later. First impressions are the most important. You can't teach an old dog new tricks. That's proactive.
Unfortunately, this word has been subject to managment-speak and yuppie-abuse for so long that the incorrect usage is now listed in the dictionary as well.
Gartner further estimates that there are approximately 90,000 COBOL programmers in the U.S. and the annual growth of COBOL code over the next four years is 5 billion lines.
That's 55,000 lines of new code per coder. Pretty aggressive estimate there.
thus cutting their workstation licensing and support costs dramatically?
A company I was once with looked at Microsoft's Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server Edition with a similar idea. Among other things, they could standardize on some NT4-specific apps without having to roll out NT4 to the whole organization. But they soon found out that the fine print of the licensing agreement said that since apps running in the terminal server were on NT4, then the user was using NT4, and if the client machine was not running NT4, you get to pay for an NT4 license. The company wound up saying "if we're gonna pay for NT4 on all our desktops, then we're gonna by God run NT4 on all our desktops". An additional downside was that whenever they want to upgrade from NT4 to NT5 (2000), they got to pay for upgrades across the board again. There were some other benfits, like WAN access and centralized administration, but licensing was definately not one of them.
Now Citrix is the company that came up with the idea of making Windows NT "multi-user" over the network. They licensed the NT3.51 source from Microsoft and fixed a lot of the "single-user-isms" and made a product out of it. Then, with NT4, Microsoft said "we won't let you make money from our OS anymore, but we will license the fixes from you so we can make money from it" and Terminal Server was born. Citrix was still making client apps for additional platforms like *NIX and handhelds and such for a while, but I'm not sure what they're up to these days.
Of course, everyone here knows that the MIT X Consortium was running graphical apps on multiuser machines over the network back in the late 1980's.
Software Estimation is fscking black art. If all you're doing is wiring together pre-built components for a database browser, then function points or some of the other metrics can get you pretty close. But any time you are solving problems that have not been solved before, like on a new platform (handheld), then the software isn't done until the problems are solved. And you may not know for sure that the problems are solved until the second or third release.
As a programmer, I have long been troubled by the fact that the primary guages for success or failure on software projects are the schedule and the budget, the two items that programmers have the least amount of influence over.
The DOJ had an airtight case against Microsoft, and then they basically dropped it. Why? Well a change in the Oval Office certainly had something to do with it, but I firmly believe that there are ethical questions here that the American people deserve to have answered.
The DMCA was passed in the House of Representatives by a "voice vote", where no record of individual votes is available. The lack of accountability created by this practice is reason enough to discontinue it. If I get screwed, I at least want to know by whom.
Consumer Broadband and Digital Television don't need Protection. Furthermore, the two are completely unreleated and have no reason to be mentioned together in the same bill. The entertainment industry wants to kill the Internet as we know and replace it with a glorified cable TV system. The Internet is not cable TV. I for one prefer it to stay that way.
Your "obsolete CV" might serve you better than you think. With all of the skills you listed, there is an implied skill that you left out, that will serve you and your future employers better than any stack of certifications will.
That is the skill of learning new skills. Flexibility and adaptability will always be in demand. Sell yourself on that.
True, a lot of employers put together a laundry list of skills for each new position. But they rarely find people who are a perfect fit for those kinds of lists.
...renaming the file to email it in a pinch shouldn't be that difficult a task.
My original point wasn't that renaming files is difficult, but that it's just one more pain in the ass that shouldn't be neccessary. It used to not be neccessary, back in the good old days when "GOOD TIMES" and "WIN A HOLIDAY" really were hoaxes.
99% of my clients don't need to bother me, because they can get files through normal channels (download from the web site). Of the 1% who need files emailed to them 0.9% can extract, rename, and run without a second thought. Which leaves the remaining 0.1%.
... paying me to perform the work on-site or their computer services person should be doing the work
They can't afford for me to come on-site <evil-grin/>. Besides, if they had IT staff available, they wouldn't be talking to me-- the IT guy would (and often does).
I've come across filters that nail BAT, EXE, COM, JS, VBS (ick), WAV, and ZIP files (deleting the whole zip file regaurdless of what's in it) in addition to the ones that comb through a zip file.
Renaming works fine, but its a PITA that wouldn't be neccessary if it weren't for *certain* email clients with huge security holes. And emailing large files wouldn't even be neccessary if everyone used standard methods to access standard type of information.
"And if yer grandma had wheels, ya could use her for luggage" as the saying goes.
If they could wait til tomorrow, they could someone from IT to figure out this infernal weird wide web thingy for them.
like naming.bat files.tab and.exe's.xex.
First of all, the only people who want files emailed to them are the ones who can't figure out to download it. Ever try explaining something as highly technical as renaming a file to an end user who can't drive a web browser?
Personally, I prefer to change EXE to EX1, so there's only one letter to change back.
My organization delivers software installers and updates to users primarily via web downloads. And pretty regularly, there is someone who can't get to the download area of the web site for whatever reason (web proxy is down, don't have/dog ate the password, the regular guy isn't here today) who wants us to "just email" him the files. Our main install is just a tad over 5 MB, which straddles the line for some people. Also, there is the occaisional need to get a particular file to an individual user, and email is the prefered method in this case.
Lately, the biggest obstacle is not file size, but attachment filters. Almost nobody can recieve an.EXE file directly (which all of our installers are), and our own incoming filter will delete.EXE files from *inside* a zip file! To send me an.EXE, you have to not only zip it, but password the zip file!
Thank you, MS Outlook, for these innovations in the use of email.
Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Mail/Minotaur/Thunderbird has LDAP support, and the Mozilla LDAP SDK supports write access, so it might actually work. I have used Mozilla Mail as my primary email client since April of 2000 (M15 or so) but not with LDAP. Try it, it just might work.
However, they ruefully note that having a cup of Irish coffee every day to prevent stroke damage will not work.
It will work on the day of the stroke! Better safe than sorry!
Colic is basically any unrecognized source of discomfort that causes a baby to cry. If doctors can't find a cause, it gets labeled as colic. Zantac might help some. Mylicon others. We tried them all.
Our middle one had it in the late afternoon. From the time she was 2 months old until 6 months, from 2pm until 5 or 6pm (just about the time I got home from work) she would scream. Just scream at the top of her lungs. Not exactly a pain cry, and not exactly angry, but definitely a "something is not right in the universe and you need to fix it NOW!" cry. When it ended each day, it was just over, and she was back with us like nothing ever happened. And then she "grew out of it" and it just stopped.
Who knows? Every baby is a person, and no two are the same. Be ready to encounter things that can't be analyzed, explained or reverse-engineered.
Guess they used up all their Photoshop skillz cranking out the main page image.
IN SOVIET RUSSIA GEORGE FOREMAN GRILLS YOU
NaCl.
You saw it here first.
How perverse would that be?
Use WINE compiled on win32 with the cygwin runtime to execute a windows app, but set WINE's display variable to the remote machine.
I built the mtools package once upon a time with cygwin to copy files into and out of a Bochs disk image file. But WINE would be way out there.
Actually, I kinda sorta remember seeing a quote from this interview back around the time it supposedly hapepned, in (maybe) Dr Dobb's. The one about bug fixes being the stupidest reason for new versions. Of course, that's what service packs are for.
Anyway, from a fresh reading, this little gem jumps out:
Sit in and listen to Win 95 calls, sit in and listen to Word calls, and wait, just wait for weeks and weeks for someone to call in and say "Oh, I found a bug in this thing"
The reason for this is that, even back in 1995, only chumps actually try to call Microsoft. Their "it's not a bug, it's feature" reputation was strong established even back then.
Optimist: Half full
Pessimist: Half empty
Engineer: Twice as big as it needs to be
Programmer: !Empty && !Full
How many programmers does it take to change a lightbulb?
None : That's a hardware problem.
Q: How does Bill Gates change a light bulb?
A: He doesn't. He just declares darkness to be the industry standard.
This one dates back to Windows 3.1 with its "cooperative" multi-tasking. One app in an infinite loop could hang the whole system. SO rather than admit that Windows did not support preemptive multitasking, Microsoft layed on the spin control saying that OS/2, Unix and were not "real-time". This sort of lead into the whole multi-media PC thing with the assumption that the OS needed to be realtime to do anything with sound or video.
Generally these same people have no action items, are the least proactive,
You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
"Active" is the opposite of "reactive". "Proactive" has nothing to do with active/reactive. The original definition had to do with learning, and the fact that information recieved earlier tends to pre-empt information recieved later. First impressions are the most important. You can't teach an old dog new tricks. That's proactive.
Unfortunately, this word has been subject to managment-speak and yuppie-abuse for so long that the incorrect usage is now listed in the dictionary as well.
Methinks the powerbook was not the only thing that was "baked".
lots of sledgehammer blows to the DASD where his data was stored.
DASD? Wow, you really *do* work at a bank! Make sure to delete the indexes of his VSAM files too.
Gartner further estimates that there are approximately 90,000 COBOL programmers in the U.S. and the annual growth of COBOL code over the next four years is 5 billion lines.
That's 55,000 lines of new code per coder. Pretty aggressive estimate there.
Well, this is COBOL we're talking about here.
thus cutting their workstation licensing and support costs dramatically?
A company I was once with looked at Microsoft's Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server Edition with a similar idea. Among other things, they could standardize on some NT4-specific apps without having to roll out NT4 to the whole organization. But they soon found out that the fine print of the licensing agreement said that since apps running in the terminal server were on NT4, then the user was using NT4, and if the client machine was not running NT4, you get to pay for an NT4 license. The company wound up saying "if we're gonna pay for NT4 on all our desktops, then we're gonna by God run NT4 on all our desktops". An additional downside was that whenever they want to upgrade from NT4 to NT5 (2000), they got to pay for upgrades across the board again. There were some other benfits, like WAN access and centralized administration, but licensing was definately not one of them.
Now Citrix is the company that came up with the idea of making Windows NT "multi-user" over the network. They licensed the NT3.51 source from Microsoft and fixed a lot of the "single-user-isms" and made a product out of it. Then, with NT4, Microsoft said "we won't let you make money from our OS anymore, but we will license the fixes from you so we can make money from it" and Terminal Server was born. Citrix was still making client apps for additional platforms like *NIX and handhelds and such for a while, but I'm not sure what they're up to these days.
Of course, everyone here knows that the MIT X Consortium was running graphical apps on multiuser machines over the network back in the late 1980's.
Software Estimation is fscking black art. If all you're doing is wiring together pre-built components for a database browser, then function points or some of the other metrics can get you pretty close. But any time you are solving problems that have not been solved before, like on a new platform (handheld), then the software isn't done until the problems are solved. And you may not know for sure that the problems are solved until the second or third release.
As a programmer, I have long been troubled by the fact that the primary guages for success or failure on software projects are the schedule and the budget, the two items that programmers have the least amount of influence over.
The DOJ had an airtight case against Microsoft, and then they basically dropped it. Why? Well a change in the Oval Office certainly had something to do with it, but I firmly believe that there are ethical questions here that the American people deserve to have answered.
The DMCA was passed in the House of Representatives by a "voice vote", where no record of individual votes is available. The lack of accountability created by this practice is reason enough to discontinue it. If I get screwed, I at least want to know by whom.
Consumer Broadband and Digital Television don't need Protection. Furthermore, the two are completely unreleated and have no reason to be mentioned together in the same bill. The entertainment industry wants to kill the Internet as we know and replace it with a glorified cable TV system. The Internet is not cable TV. I for one prefer it to stay that way.
Will it play the Ellen Feiss "Switcher" ad? That would be so bitchin...
Your "obsolete CV" might serve you better than you think. With all of the skills you listed, there is an implied skill that you left out, that will serve you and your future employers better than any stack of certifications will.
That is the skill of learning new skills. Flexibility and adaptability will always be in demand. Sell yourself on that.
True, a lot of employers put together a laundry list of skills for each new position. But they rarely find people who are a perfect fit for those kinds of lists.
...renaming the file to email it in a pinch shouldn't be that difficult a task.
My original point wasn't that renaming files is difficult, but that it's just one more pain in the ass that shouldn't be neccessary. It used to not be neccessary, back in the good old days when "GOOD TIMES" and "WIN A HOLIDAY" really were hoaxes.
99% of my clients don't need to bother me, because they can get files through normal channels (download from the web site). Of the 1% who need files emailed to them 0.9% can extract, rename, and run without a second thought. Which leaves the remaining 0.1%.
They can't afford for me to come on-site <evil-grin/>. Besides, if they had IT staff available, they wouldn't be talking to me-- the IT guy would (and often does).
As for your specific problem, you are letting someone elses problem be your problem,
When they pays us money, their problems become our problems. Another fact of life.
I've come across filters that nail BAT, EXE, COM, JS, VBS (ick), WAV, and ZIP files (deleting the whole zip file regaurdless of what's in it) in addition to the ones that comb through a zip file.
Renaming works fine, but its a PITA that wouldn't be neccessary if it weren't for *certain* email clients with huge security holes. And emailing large files wouldn't even be neccessary if everyone used standard methods to access standard type of information.
"And if yer grandma had wheels, ya could use her for luggage" as the saying goes.
Overnight a CD if it is that important
.bat files .tab and .exe's .xex.
If they could wait til tomorrow, they could someone from IT to figure out this infernal weird wide web thingy for them.
like naming
First of all, the only people who want files emailed to them are the ones who can't figure out to download it. Ever try explaining something as highly technical as renaming a file to an end user who can't drive a web browser?
Personally, I prefer to change EXE to EX1, so there's only one letter to change back.
My organization delivers software installers and updates to users primarily via web downloads. And pretty regularly, there is someone who can't get to the download area of the web site for whatever reason (web proxy is down, don't have/dog ate the password, the regular guy isn't here today) who wants us to "just email" him the files. Our main install is just a tad over 5 MB, which straddles the line for some people. Also, there is the occaisional need to get a particular file to an individual user, and email is the prefered method in this case.
.EXE file directly (which all of our installers are), and our own incoming filter will delete .EXE files from *inside* a zip file! To send me an .EXE, you have to not only zip it, but password the zip file!
Lately, the biggest obstacle is not file size, but attachment filters. Almost nobody can recieve an
Thank you, MS Outlook, for these innovations in the use of email.
Suppose the following:
"Mr. Smith, I have the Carpenters and Joiners Union for you on line 1, and Bill Gates is holding on line 2."
Which call do you think Rep. Smith is going to answer first?