They actually have quite a history of apps on the Mac, they produce a majority of the Mac business apps. Back in the middle of the Netscape wars they threatened to stop producing Mac software if Apple didn't side with them and push IE.
I've been trying to point out that most of the MCSE that make up the stereotype are newbies, they've been computering for about 6 months, cut them some freaking slack. Of course some people are just going to be useless, that goes without saying, but there are plenty of "MCSEs" who are extremely happy to have you dispense some wisdom. Bring them into the culture fortunately or un they're here to stay, make it comfortable for yourself.
That NT != DOS is irrelivent, it is it's successor and I think some history would have been part of the curriculum. I have attended one single MS certification based class - and I left midway due to the lack of content. Taking a class or set of classes and passing tests does not make a qualified admin. The fact that out of 5 seperate people, none would even attempt to exert some effort to try, to me suggested that since it wasn't covered in their training - it wasn't worth knowing.
I worked at a training company for two years, I know exactly the type of person your talking about I'd say that the problem is that they aren't tinkerers, you or I would say hey what's the worst thing that can happen I format the disk and start over. The mentality of the stereotypical MCSE is one who's either scared they'll break something or the type of person who'll try anything possible data loss be damned.
The problem with the MCSE program is that since anyone who's over 16 and has any computer knowledge is already employed, companies are looking for anyone. Most state unemployment programs offer retraining in... surprise! The computer industry. The recently unemployed leave with 5-6 weeks of classes and hopefully, if they passed the tests, an MCSE. Out into the world they go with no experience. They show up at a couple of interviews and since they were the only one of the five applicants with any tangible experience (the MCSE) they land the job. Two months later they've got every other person with a clue in the department slapping their heads.
Eventually they'll become productive members of the IT community complaining about the new round of MCSEs and their stupid antics. I guess what I'm saying is cut the newbies some slack, you were there once, I know I was.
The MCSE allows new persons to enter IT, diminishing the need for a CS degree or years of experience -- this is good.
No, its bad. It means that you have people doing IT things who don't understand IT. People can learn on their own, but an MCSE dosn't prove that they have, just that they crammed the locations of a bunch of checkmarks and buttons.
I guess you haven't seen anything in the news about the economy doing very well right now? Especially the technology sector? Unemployment being down? Demand for people with ANY computer knowledge is bringing in people who have no clue, not the MCSE program. What it is designed to do is show who's got an understanding (or can at least take a test about) Microsoft's products. You can take the tests and get your MCSE without ever taking a class. They're happy to have you learn it on your own, MS has a series of books out to help you do it.
Indeed -- since Linux people spend less time on the phone waiting for Microsoft to tell them to re-install, they get more done. And since Linux people have, in general, a much better handle on what their systems are actually doing (because they "tinker" all the time), they can fix problems faster and better.
You're being as biased as he is. I've never called MS over a problem, it's not worth the time, I figure it out myself or look for help on the net (sound like most Linux support?). Second you can reinstall Linux and fix a problem too, but just as with NT it's not always the fastest or most efficient way to fix it.
You seem to think that everyone who wants to thinker is using Linux, I'd disagree I've met a bunch of smart people who use NT. I've also met hundreds of the stereotypical MCSE, afer all it's a stereotype for a reason. What I'm trying to say is don't judge people by the OS they work on. The behavior you point out is much more telling of the way people learn.
I can make the same argument for training:
since trained people spend less time on the phone waiting for Microsoft, they get more done. And since trained people have, in general, a much better handle on what their systems are actually doing, they can fix problems faster and better.
Tinkering is just one method of learning; whether you teach yourself or you take a class you can get the same information. Some people learn better with a structured lesson plan and some people pick things up faster on their own. Personally I like a class if I need to get a bunch of information into my head in a short time. I can get a much more thorough understanding by playing around with it, but it takes longer.
I'd say that the problem with people who tinker (of which I'm one) is that much more likely to be screwing around with some new piece of software. The benefit of this is that you don't have to send them off for training they're comfortable learning it themselves. The class learner tends to be more focused (read productive) but you drop two grand on classes every year or so. Personally I like self trained people (but again I'm biased) I think they're more flexible.
Again, I ask you to try begging for a day and then come tell me how it's not work just as hard as the work you do.
Whether it is difficult is utterly irrelevant, as it produces nothing of value. Would you argue that robbers are productive members of society because they have to carry all those heavy packages?
Personally I don't think the point of life is to create things of value. I assume that's an artifact of your religious/spiritual upbringing. If you look at it from a purely biological standpoint it's just to procreate. Personally I think you're so attached to your worldly positions that when you see someone get something without doing the same thing you did to get it you feel bitter. Some people would feel the same way about your upbringing what did you do to deserve the upbringing you got? Nothing? Well I don't think they should have to justify getting a free meal.
Sigh. I'm not sure how helping Kent eat makes third-world children starve,
Simple supply-and-demand economics: any increase in paying demand on a limited supply raises the price. There are so many people on the edge of starvation that any increase in food prices causes more people to starve, usually children. Regardless of how screwed up the food production/distribution system is, it does respond to increased demand by raising prices.
Considering how much food is thrown away in this country each day I doubt that buy buying someone a meal you're forcing a child to starve. If you're that worried about it stop paying MediaOne (or who ever) for cable TV and donate the money instead to a charity that helps people in the third world.
The implication being that panhandlers don't have that potential?
If they do, they should be helped to find it. Your own description seems to be of helpless people who can't do a job. A random child is much more likely to develop into someone who pulls his share than a full-grown man with a history of begging.
What if their talent is story telling? If you pay a famous person to read their biography, what's the problem with paying a homeless person (in the form of a meal or a ride) to tell you about their lives? From some of the stories I've heard I can say that they're more interesting than what is on TV.
"Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for life."
Conversation is an art in the same way that playing an instrument is. If I have an entertaing half hour talking to someone while they eat, spending three or four bucks to buy them the meal is worth it. I feel that they've earned it just as if they'd writen a song I liked or painted a picture I liked.
So if I'm encouraging people to become better story tellers so be it.
The Qualcomm pdQ meets a good 75% of your criteria but by combining phone and PDA you've created a mule. Try entering a number someone left on your voice mail onto the device you envision. I have to keep in my head, flip the unit over, jot it down, then flip it back over so I can get the rest of the message.
I'm going to have to agree with the other posters that I'd rather have several small flexible tools than one monolithic one, integrate them with BlueTooth and keep them simple.
I agree with you for the most part but I believe that form factor has little to do with the greater number of cell phone owners than PDA owners. I'd propose two reasons.
Primarily cost, a cell phone is often included with the service; it's a lot easier to sell that model.
Second a PDA makes no sense unless you own a computer. Remember those phone lists Sharp made ten years ago? No one bought them because they're a pain to enter data on and you can't back them up. The entire Palm paradigm (which is acknowledged as the first commercial success) is the PDA is a roving window into the data on your desktop computer.
This is primarily cultural - teenage mavericks are celebrated in the US and viewed with alarm or contempt in traditional, bureaucratic societies like those of Europe or Japan.
I think Katz would would be happy to argue this statement with you...
Don't forget about the Indian Reservations, New Jersey, or the river boat gambling, much less state lotteries. Nevada is far from the only place gambling is legal.
ROT was designed to be a Wolf3d killer. It had plenty o feature bloat and was a mildly innovative game. The only problem was it came out after Doom and it's Wolf3d origins showed.
I think they'd rather be shut down than take those "simple steps". That'd be pretty much admiting that they could have protected commercial music all along and didn't.
Most things don't get made illegal until there's a noticeable problem with them. Since the amount of people who use CBs is a tiny fraction of the population the number of accidents because of them would be correspondingly low. If 30+ percent of the population was using CBs the same studies would be occurring and the same legislation would be enacted.
This is inaccurate. The total cost of taxes on automobile transportation are more than enough to pay for interstates and highways. The only reason that doesn't happen is because people come up with hairbrained schemes like your proposal to transfer income from people who drive cars to people who take buses.
Which taxes are you talking about? Gas taxes, registration? Do you seriously think that these pay for interstates and highways? They might pay for local streets but a majority of the money for roads comes from the Federal Government. Even if you're a few years out of high school/college you should know that Federal money comes from... you guessed it Federal taxes.
It is public transportation after all, not private, which requires exorbitant subsidies. At the college I work at the local Greens talked the college into subsidizing free bus passes for all students to cut down on automobile use, the only problem being that some like half a percent of all students actually use the service. Even when it doesn't cost money, the opportunity cost of public transportation is extremely high.
It's public transportation that gets the obvious subsidy. Private transportation is subsides, you realize the amount when you see how dependant the states are on it. It's the reason there's a uniform drinking age of 21 in the US. The states didn't just all decide on it by chance, the Federal government threatened to take away their highway money if they didn't raise it.
What your don't take into account in your example are the hidden costs of driving, like parking spaces. Over the course of a year, totaling all expenses a single parking space costs approximately $1000. I'm sure they don't pass the full cost along as parking fees. It comes out of operating expenses, which if it's a state school is tax dollars. If they can reduce the amount of parking needed then they've saved money. Talk to the greens, I'm sure they'd be happy to let you know exactly what they told the administration that convinced them to start the program.
Slashdot Mirror
They actually have quite a history of apps on the Mac, they produce a majority of the Mac business apps. Back in the middle of the Netscape wars they threatened to stop producing Mac software if Apple didn't side with them and push IE.
You're correct, normally I compose my posts a word processor it catches most of my spelling...
It's called Fourth
I'd love to have you show me one person who got an MCSE without ever having touched a computer. If they did, they deserved it.
I've been trying to point out that most of the MCSE that make up the stereotype are newbies, they've been computering for about 6 months, cut them some freaking slack. Of course some people are just going to be useless, that goes without saying, but there are plenty of "MCSEs" who are extremely happy to have you dispense some wisdom. Bring them into the culture fortunately or un they're here to stay, make it comfortable for yourself.
That NT != DOS is irrelivent, it is it's successor and I think some history would have been part of the curriculum. I have attended one single MS certification based class - and I left midway due to the lack of content. Taking a class or set of classes and passing tests does not make a qualified admin. The fact that out of 5 seperate people, none would even attempt to exert some effort to try, to me suggested that since it wasn't covered in their training - it wasn't worth knowing.
I worked at a training company for two years, I know exactly the type of person your talking about I'd say that the problem is that they aren't tinkerers, you or I would say hey what's the worst thing that can happen I format the disk and start over. The mentality of the stereotypical MCSE is one who's either scared they'll break something or the type of person who'll try anything possible data loss be damned.
The problem with the MCSE program is that since anyone who's over 16 and has any computer knowledge is already employed, companies are looking for anyone. Most state unemployment programs offer retraining in... surprise! The computer industry. The recently unemployed leave with 5-6 weeks of classes and hopefully, if they passed the tests, an MCSE. Out into the world they go with no experience. They show up at a couple of interviews and since they were the only one of the five applicants with any tangible experience (the MCSE) they land the job. Two months later they've got every other person with a clue in the department slapping their heads.
Eventually they'll become productive members of the IT community complaining about the new round of MCSEs and their stupid antics. I guess what I'm saying is cut the newbies some slack, you were there once, I know I was.
No, its bad. It means that you have people doing IT things who don't understand IT. People can learn on their own, but an MCSE dosn't prove that they have, just that they crammed the locations of a bunch of checkmarks and buttons.
I guess you haven't seen anything in the news about the economy doing very well right now? Especially the technology sector? Unemployment being down? Demand for people with ANY computer knowledge is bringing in people who have no clue, not the MCSE program. What it is designed to do is show who's got an understanding (or can at least take a test about) Microsoft's products. You can take the tests and get your MCSE without ever taking a class. They're happy to have you learn it on your own, MS has a series of books out to help you do it.
You're being as biased as he is. I've never called MS over a problem, it's not worth the time, I figure it out myself or look for help on the net (sound like most Linux support?). Second you can reinstall Linux and fix a problem too, but just as with NT it's not always the fastest or most efficient way to fix it.
You seem to think that everyone who wants to thinker is using Linux, I'd disagree I've met a bunch of smart people who use NT. I've also met hundreds of the stereotypical MCSE, afer all it's a stereotype for a reason. What I'm trying to say is don't judge people by the OS they work on. The behavior you point out is much more telling of the way people learn.
I can make the same argument for training:
Tinkering is just one method of learning; whether you teach yourself or you take a class you can get the same information. Some people learn better with a structured lesson plan and some people pick things up faster on their own. Personally I like a class if I need to get a bunch of information into my head in a short time. I can get a much more thorough understanding by playing around with it, but it takes longer.
I'd say that the problem with people who tinker (of which I'm one) is that much more likely to be screwing around with some new piece of software. The benefit of this is that you don't have to send them off for training they're comfortable learning it themselves. The class learner tends to be more focused (read productive) but you drop two grand on classes every year or so. Personally I like self trained people (but again I'm biased) I think they're more flexible.
Again, I ask you to try begging for a day and then come tell me how it's not work just as hard as the work you do.
Whether it is difficult is utterly irrelevant, as it produces nothing of value. Would you argue that robbers are productive members of society because they have to carry all those heavy packages?
Personally I don't think the point of life is to create things of value. I assume that's an artifact of your religious/spiritual upbringing. If you look at it from a purely biological standpoint it's just to procreate. Personally I think you're so attached to your worldly positions that when you see someone get something without doing the same thing you did to get it you feel bitter. Some people would feel the same way about your upbringing what did you do to deserve the upbringing you got? Nothing? Well I don't think they should have to justify getting a free meal.
Sigh. I'm not sure how helping Kent eat makes third-world children starve,
Simple supply-and-demand economics: any increase in paying demand on a limited supply raises the price. There are so many people on the edge of starvation that any increase in food prices causes more people to starve, usually children. Regardless of how screwed up the food production/distribution system is, it does respond to increased demand by raising prices.
Considering how much food is thrown away in this country each day I doubt that buy buying someone a meal you're forcing a child to starve. If you're that worried about it stop paying MediaOne (or who ever) for cable TV and donate the money instead to a charity that helps people in the third world.
The implication being that panhandlers don't have that potential?
If they do, they should be helped to find it. Your own description seems to be of helpless people who can't do a job. A random child is much more likely to develop into someone who pulls his share than a full-grown man with a history of begging.
What if their talent is story telling? If you pay a famous person to read their biography, what's the problem with paying a homeless person (in the form of a meal or a ride) to tell you about their lives? From some of the stories I've heard I can say that they're more interesting than what is on TV.
"Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for life."
Conversation is an art in the same way that playing an instrument is. If I have an entertaing half hour talking to someone while they eat, spending three or four bucks to buy them the meal is worth it. I feel that they've earned it just as if they'd writen a song I liked or painted a picture I liked.
So if I'm encouraging people to become better story tellers so be it.
Functional but doesnt' really meet the graph part of the requirement...
I'm going to have to agree with the other posters that I'd rather have several small flexible tools than one monolithic one, integrate them with BlueTooth and keep them simple.
I agree with you for the most part but I believe that form factor has little to do with the greater number of cell phone owners than PDA owners. I'd propose two reasons.
Primarily cost, a cell phone is often included with the service; it's a lot easier to sell that model.
Second a PDA makes no sense unless you own a computer. Remember those phone lists Sharp made ten years ago? No one bought them because they're a pain to enter data on and you can't back them up. The entire Palm paradigm (which is acknowledged as the first commercial success) is the PDA is a roving window into the data on your desktop computer.
apparently not.
This is primarily cultural - teenage mavericks are celebrated in the US and viewed with alarm or contempt in traditional, bureaucratic societies like those of Europe or Japan. I think Katz would would be happy to argue this statement with you...
I think his definition of safe and yours differ. I happen to think he's correct, vb is a good at what it does.
Don't forget about the Indian Reservations, New Jersey, or the river boat gambling, much less state lotteries. Nevada is far from the only place gambling is legal.
ROT was designed to be a Wolf3d killer. It had plenty o feature bloat and was a mildly innovative game. The only problem was it came out after Doom and it's Wolf3d origins showed.
I think they'd rather be shut down than take those "simple steps". That'd be pretty much admiting that they could have protected commercial music all along and didn't.
no problem ;)
Most things don't get made illegal until there's a noticeable problem with them. Since the amount of people who use CBs is a tiny fraction of the population the number of accidents because of them would be correspondingly low. If 30+ percent of the population was using CBs the same studies would be occurring and the same legislation would be enacted.
This is inaccurate. The total cost of taxes on automobile transportation are more than enough to pay for interstates and highways. The only reason that doesn't happen is because people come up with hairbrained schemes like your proposal to transfer income from people who drive cars to people who take buses.
Which taxes are you talking about? Gas taxes, registration? Do you seriously think that these pay for interstates and highways? They might pay for local streets but a majority of the money for roads comes from the Federal Government. Even if you're a few years out of high school/college you should know that Federal money comes from... you guessed it Federal taxes.
It is public transportation after all, not private, which requires exorbitant subsidies. At the college I work at the local Greens talked the college into subsidizing free bus passes for all students to cut down on automobile use, the only problem being that some like half a percent of all students actually use the service. Even when it doesn't cost money, the opportunity cost of public transportation is extremely high.
It's public transportation that gets the obvious subsidy. Private transportation is subsides, you realize the amount when you see how dependant the states are on it. It's the reason there's a uniform drinking age of 21 in the US. The states didn't just all decide on it by chance, the Federal government threatened to take away their highway money if they didn't raise it.
What your don't take into account in your example are the hidden costs of driving, like parking spaces. Over the course of a year, totaling all expenses a single parking space costs approximately $1000. I'm sure they don't pass the full cost along as parking fees. It comes out of operating expenses, which if it's a state school is tax dollars. If they can reduce the amount of parking needed then they've saved money. Talk to the greens, I'm sure they'd be happy to let you know exactly what they told the administration that convinced them to start the program.
It's called a bicycle.
You can always pump it back into the ground. The have to pump something in to keep it stable.
as long as they moderate it up as FUNNY i've got no problem with his quack bullshit.