It sounds to me like you've worked at places that aren't compatible with your talents. Am I wrong in assuming that you've worked predominantly in very large companies? A Jack-Of-All-Trades isn't as valuable in a larger organization as there tends to be a correlation between headcount and specialization. You should probably look for work in smaller organizations or startups, where being a Jack-Of-All-Trades is extremely useful. In these type of environments, the organization usually can't afford a body for every single role, so being competent in a lot of different areas is key. Although job security may not be as great in a smaller organization, if you work for a startup, you may be able to get stock options or equity of some kind. It depends what you're looking for. One other poster mentioned consulting, which could also be an attractive alternative.
What do you want to do? I think answering that question would make this question kind of moot. At the very least, it would prevent you from wasting a lot of time and money getting a degree that puts you no closer to your goals than you were before.
As the subject line sugests, I think open sourcing Java would be a great thing for Java. The problem is that it's not such a great thing for Sun. As shown in this thread/article, Sun is not doing so well. They really don't have a lot going for them. Java is one of the few big things happening at Sun right now. Why would they want to let go of Java right now? At the very least, Java makes them look like a good IBM acquisition in case things really start to go south.
Currently there are two platforms for doing hardcore web development: J2EE and.Net. Here are the main reasons why:
1) The languages supported are fully object oriented. I hear PHP is getting an upgrade in that department with version 5, but it's in beta right now (that doesn't help those of us who needed it yesterday).
2) Performance. J2EE and.Net application are pre-compiled (dynamically linked, mind you, but pre-compiled). PHP has to compile AND dynamically link everything at run time.
3) Managed persistence. Well, J2EE is the only platform with this right now, but.Net is supposed to get it in the next version.
I selected C# and the.Net platform for my company's product offerings because I only needed to learn the language(s) and the libraries and not some complex deployment procedure (like you do with J2EE). The point is that I would like to be able to host these applications on Linux in the near future. I work for a REAL company that would really like to do this. I'm not some ideologue.
From what I understand, the Mono project pretty much has a complete implementation of both the ASP.Net and ADO.Net libraries, and that will do for the vast majority of web applications. Therefore, I completely disagree with the author's comment that "even if Mono or dotGNU gets 99 percent of the way there, that's not enough." His analysis might be more accurate if your talking about desktop applications, but I don't think his arguments really have any relevance to web apps.
At the very least, Mono and dotGNU will give Java/J2EE a little healthy competition on some different platforms.
Maybe said developers will start coding more standards-compliant webpages.
Placing the onerous of standards compliance squarely on the shoulders of developers is pointless. Developers are simply trying to get the job done and create something that works. There are so many disparate technologies and moving parts involved in a sufficiently complex web application, that it is unfair to demand perfection in this area from developers. Visual Studio developers are not criticized for producing non-ANSI C++ compliant code. Why should are expectations of developers be any different when it comes to web development? In order for the problem to be fully solved, the dominant browser will need to force developers into standards compliance.
...Michael Wallent, a general manager in Microsoft's Windows division who ran the IE team for versions 5.5 and 6, and who has been involved in the Eolas defense since the suit was filed.
"When you think about this, having to go around the patent highlights the stupidity of the patent system," [Wallent] said. "Everyone in the field is very saddened by the whole thing, that we have to go through this exercise. The W3C has worked very hard to make the Web remain patent free and this might be the one thing that screws it all up. It's really very frustrating."
It's good to see that even those within a large company like Microsoft are finally getting tired of the patent system the way it is. Maybe we'll start to see some effective lobbying from such software giants. I can't think of another instance in which the industry has been stung so badly by one of these ridiculous patents.
The way I see it, OSS is making software available for free whether it be directly or indirectly. Whatever Microsoft's motives may be, they'd probably be much less inclined to donate this much software at no cost if OSS hadn't pressured them into doing so. At the end of the day, these organizations are still able to save some money. What's wrong with that? It's not like this is going to make OSS disappear. We'll just have to polish our software up if we want these organizations to use our software in light of other free alternatives.
The system would seem custom-made for fast-growing companies, since a new employee can grab an I.D. card, find a free desk, and go. But Sun has really revved up the program since its own growth stalled, along with the Internet economy.
Alright, so they can plug you into the system really quickly and get rid of you just as fast. I mean, we wouldn't want companies to be "inconvenienced" by those mass layoffs would we?
There is no way that we could ever do political ads that are as slick, as decietful, and unfortunately, as effective as they could. They'd have Cher saying how she supports Senator Asswad, and we'd have some finnish geek saying something that Joe Sixpack doesn't understand, in an accent that annoys him.
On the other hand, Joe Sixpack doesn't really care that people are "stealing" from Hollywood. It doesn't personally affect him/her. However, I think Joe Sixpack will be really pissed off about not being able to play his music and movies when and where he wants to. Hollywood may be able to create slicker ads, but they're fighting for an unpopular view. We have the upper hand in that respect.
Give a gigantic tax credit to those homeowners who "host" a switch, and have their neighbors' wires come to their home to be routed to other neighbors or neighborhoods.
Hey, why use wires? Why don't we just start building a huge wireless network across the country? Who needs the corporate owned network called the internet that we currently use when we've got something like 802.llb? Now granted, it may not be as fast as DSL or Cable, but it sure beats the dial-up connection I'm currently using. It would be a lot cheaper too. All we'd have to do is put up the money for the hardware. We could start right now in urban areas!
I don't think making a ton of money is Microsoft's primary goal with the XBox. That's not to say that they don't want the XBox to be profitable, it's just not their main goal. I think what they're really trying to do is get as many proprietary, Microsoft controlled systems into as many homes as they can. They don't want just a monopoly on the PC desktop, they want to control the whole platform. This is the reason why Microsoft will not take kindly to emulators. If you don't believe me, just wait until the HomeStation (or whatever they decide to call it) comes out.
I wonder if Comedy Central would have any interest in picking the series up. I think the demographics of Comedy Central would be a perfect fit for the show. Oh well, that's just wishful thinking. It was fun to watch while it lasted.
I beleive it is up to the parent to decide what is right for their child to play. If their parent decides it is okay for their child to play World War II online, then it is her decision and not that of the BC government.
Yes, but ratings do not keep parents from deciding what is appropriate for their child. Ratings only help parents make this decision.
I must say, I'm pretty pleased with these terms. These provisions address almost all of the means by which Microsoft has maintained their monopoly. If properly enforced, Microsofy will no longer be able to do the following:
Extend and embrace existing protocols and interfaces in order to prevent competitors from entering the market. The Halloween document strategy would be eliminated.
Threaten OEM's with anticompetitive liscenses. OEM's should now have a lot more control of the desktops of the systems they sell.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the "Ban on Retaliation" and the "Freedom to Install Middleware Software" provisions give OEM's control of the bootloader as well. This means that we may start seeing some dual boot systems for sale from the likes of HP/Compaq, Gateway, Dell, etc.
Call me crazy, but who is going to pay $99 for a buggy version of Windows (buggier then Microsoft's version that is)? You might as well just go out and purchase the real thing once you've shelled out that much cash. Maybe they're just targeting businesses right now. However, I'm sure that most reasonably large companies pay much less than retail prices for Windows with bulk licensing deals.
You know, if we could just get soft money out of the political system we probably wouldn't even have to worry about terrible legislation like the SSSCA and the DMCA. I think soft money is at the root of this whole problem. Our freedoms are simply being sold to the highest bidder which in this case just so happens to be the entertainment industry.
I just graduated with a Comp. Sci. degree in May and had a very difficult time finding a job as well. I sent out a ton of resumes and interviewed for many positions until I finally got an offer (which I graciously accepted).
Times are extremely tough for entry level developers. Everyone seems to want someone with at least 2-3 years of experience because they need that person to have a more immediate impact on their bottom line. Most companies don't want to take a risk on someone who is unproven and just can't afford to hire someone that will require a long training period. Hopefully the economy will begin to turn around, though. I wish your girlfriend luck!
Before we all get too worried about losing our beloved Linux and other OSS, just remember that OSS has a lot of money behind it too now (IBM, Sun, etc.)
Slashdot Mirror
It sounds to me like you've worked at places that aren't compatible with your talents. Am I wrong in assuming that you've worked predominantly in very large companies? A Jack-Of-All-Trades isn't as valuable in a larger organization as there tends to be a correlation between headcount and specialization. You should probably look for work in smaller organizations or startups, where being a Jack-Of-All-Trades is extremely useful. In these type of environments, the organization usually can't afford a body for every single role, so being competent in a lot of different areas is key. Although job security may not be as great in a smaller organization, if you work for a startup, you may be able to get stock options or equity of some kind. It depends what you're looking for. One other poster mentioned consulting, which could also be an attractive alternative.
No. Their stock dropped because earnings were below forecasts, not because of this incident with the DoJ.
What do you want to do? I think answering that question would make this question kind of moot. At the very least, it would prevent you from wasting a lot of time and money getting a degree that puts you no closer to your goals than you were before.
How about 20GB in the size of a small cell phone?
o ol s/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1019010
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchT
As the subject line sugests, I think open sourcing Java would be a great thing for Java. The problem is that it's not such a great thing for Sun. As shown in this thread/article, Sun is not doing so well. They really don't have a lot going for them. Java is one of the few big things happening at Sun right now. Why would they want to let go of Java right now? At the very least, Java makes them look like a good IBM acquisition in case things really start to go south.
1) The languages supported are fully object oriented. I hear PHP is getting an upgrade in that department with version 5, but it's in beta right now (that doesn't help those of us who needed it yesterday).
2) Performance. J2EE and .Net application are pre-compiled (dynamically linked, mind you, but pre-compiled). PHP has to compile AND dynamically link everything at run time.
3) Managed persistence. Well, J2EE is the only platform with this right now, but .Net is supposed to get it in the next version.
From what I understand, the Mono project pretty much has a complete implementation of both the ASP.Net and ADO.Net libraries, and that will do for the vast majority of web applications. Therefore, I completely disagree with the author's comment that "even if Mono or dotGNU gets 99 percent of the way there, that's not enough." His analysis might be more accurate if your talking about desktop applications, but I don't think his arguments really have any relevance to web apps.
At the very least, Mono and dotGNU will give Java/J2EE a little healthy competition on some different platforms.
Placing the onerous of standards compliance squarely on the shoulders of developers is pointless. Developers are simply trying to get the job done and create something that works. There are so many disparate technologies and moving parts involved in a sufficiently complex web application, that it is unfair to demand perfection in this area from developers. Visual Studio developers are not criticized for producing non-ANSI C++ compliant code. Why should are expectations of developers be any different when it comes to web development? In order for the problem to be fully solved, the dominant browser will need to force developers into standards compliance.
"When you think about this, having to go around the patent highlights the stupidity of the patent system," [Wallent] said. "Everyone in the field is very saddened by the whole thing, that we have to go through this exercise. The W3C has worked very hard to make the Web remain patent free and this might be the one thing that screws it all up. It's really very frustrating."
It's good to see that even those within a large company like Microsoft are finally getting tired of the patent system the way it is. Maybe we'll start to see some effective lobbying from such software giants. I can't think of another instance in which the industry has been stung so badly by one of these ridiculous patents.
The way I see it, OSS is making software available for free whether it be directly or indirectly. Whatever Microsoft's motives may be, they'd probably be much less inclined to donate this much software at no cost if OSS hadn't pressured them into doing so. At the end of the day, these organizations are still able to save some money. What's wrong with that? It's not like this is going to make OSS disappear. We'll just have to polish our software up if we want these organizations to use our software in light of other free alternatives.
That's just what they want you to think. Wheels within wheels, man, wheels within wheels...
Alright, so they can plug you into the system really quickly and get rid of you just as fast. I mean, we wouldn't want companies to be "inconvenienced" by those mass layoffs would we?
On the other hand, Joe Sixpack doesn't really care that people are "stealing" from Hollywood. It doesn't personally affect him/her. However, I think Joe Sixpack will be really pissed off about not being able to play his music and movies when and where he wants to. Hollywood may be able to create slicker ads, but they're fighting for an unpopular view. We have the upper hand in that respect.
Hey, why use wires? Why don't we just start building a huge wireless network across the country? Who needs the corporate owned network called the internet that we currently use when we've got something like 802.llb? Now granted, it may not be as fast as DSL or Cable, but it sure beats the dial-up connection I'm currently using. It would be a lot cheaper too. All we'd have to do is put up the money for the hardware. We could start right now in urban areas!
I don't think making a ton of money is Microsoft's primary goal with the XBox. That's not to say that they don't want the XBox to be profitable, it's just not their main goal. I think what they're really trying to do is get as many proprietary, Microsoft controlled systems into as many homes as they can. They don't want just a monopoly on the PC desktop, they want to control the whole platform. This is the reason why Microsoft will not take kindly to emulators. If you don't believe me, just wait until the HomeStation (or whatever they decide to call it) comes out.
I wonder if Comedy Central would have any interest in picking the series up. I think the demographics of Comedy Central would be a perfect fit for the show. Oh well, that's just wishful thinking. It was fun to watch while it lasted.
Yes, but ratings do not keep parents from deciding what is appropriate for their child. Ratings only help parents make this decision.
I disagree. Movies are rated, but this does not lead people to believe that movies are only for kids.
- Extend and embrace existing protocols and interfaces in order to prevent competitors from entering the market. The Halloween document strategy would be eliminated.
- Threaten OEM's with anticompetitive liscenses. OEM's should now have a lot more control of the desktops of the systems they sell.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the "Ban on Retaliation" and the "Freedom to Install Middleware Software" provisions give OEM's control of the bootloader as well. This means that we may start seeing some dual boot systems for sale from the likes of HP/Compaq, Gateway, Dell, etc.Windows = $200
Linux = $0
Call me crazy, but who is going to pay $99 for a buggy version of Windows (buggier then Microsoft's version that is)? You might as well just go out and purchase the real thing once you've shelled out that much cash. Maybe they're just targeting businesses right now. However, I'm sure that most reasonably large companies pay much less than retail prices for Windows with bulk licensing deals.
You know, if we could just get soft money out of the political system we probably wouldn't even have to worry about terrible legislation like the SSSCA and the DMCA. I think soft money is at the root of this whole problem. Our freedoms are simply being sold to the highest bidder which in this case just so happens to be the entertainment industry.
I just graduated with a Comp. Sci. degree in May and had a very difficult time finding a job as well. I sent out a ton of resumes and interviewed for many positions until I finally got an offer (which I graciously accepted).
Times are extremely tough for entry level developers. Everyone seems to want someone with at least 2-3 years of experience because they need that person to have a more immediate impact on their bottom line. Most companies don't want to take a risk on someone who is unproven and just can't afford to hire someone that will require a long training period. Hopefully the economy will begin to turn around, though. I wish your girlfriend luck!
Before we all get too worried about losing our beloved Linux and other OSS, just remember that OSS has a lot of money behind it too now (IBM, Sun, etc.)
While I still think advertising can work, this is a pretty darn good idea!