Source Depot isn't available to the general public though, correct?
Source Safe's real failure, in my experience, was that if you ever renamed or moved a file it would often completely lose the history for that file, often to the point of giving you garbage errors when you tried to get old versions.
So, based on the review the employees of Microsoft seemed to be of the opinion that Microsoft was good at a local leve but not good at a global level.
This is consistent with my long experience with Micrsoft development... some piece of Microsoft's software and tools are really good, others are bad, but never is there any kind of overarching consistency and philosophy. Even parts of Win32 itself aren't consistent with other parts... everything seems to be developed in a fairly isolated environment and crammed together at a higher level into a final product.
My own experience with an ex-Microsoft employee was very telling. I worked with him only briefly, and he was a really sharp guy who had worked on the NT kernel and SQL Server for several years. He had good ideas and a penchant for simplicity that seemed very un-Microsoft-like.
Interestingly, I learned some really interesting things about the Microsoft environment. The first was when I asked why "Internet Connection Sharing" and "RAS" were so buggy and bad. His reply was that the good people were all working on NAT for the server OS's. We repeated this conversation on several topics.
The other thing that was very telling was that MS does not use Source Safe in-house. No wonder... it's awful. Apparently thay have an in-house source control/configuration management solution which works much better... and yet they sell Source Safe.
From what I can tell as an outsider, the real genius of Microsoft is at these lower levels (and places like Microsoft Research) and that genius gets diluted or corrupted at a higher level of trying to integrate all the pieces of the world's largest software monopoly ^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h company.
I wouldn't call them stupid, but I also acknowledge they are fluff entertainment... just like Star Wars/ Just with 10 times better SFX, action, and acting (and that's saying a lot because the acting in the Matrix movies isn't very good at all).
I agree with you about "fanatics", but there's nothing wrong with watching a movie and really liking it. It's just like music... I can listen to and appreciate the most complex and sophisticated music there is, and yet I still like the Surf Punks. I guess I'm just not a snob.
... and Episode III will not be one tenth as cool as The Matrix Revolutions. Sorry, George. You blew it the second time around. If only you could have realized that while you are a visionary and perhaps even a decent writer, you are a lousy director.
I get the humor, but most of the Greens I've met are pretty tech-savvy. The joke does bring up the important question of how our techology needs to be tied into a larger ecological outlook, and then that brings up the question of where we are today versus where we should be going in terms of production, power-generation, and re-use, materials reclamation, and disposal.
I'm not surprised. Members of third parties tend to fall into two groups in my experience. The smaller of these groups is the total nutjobs, but I think most third-party people are intelligent people who think we should take the road less travelled and are willing to put their money where their mouths are. I may not agree with them or their ideas, but I have to respect their exercise of their principles. If more people were like this, we would not have a reason to be cynical of our two party system because there would be, more than rarely, a viable alternative.
Well, let's see, if the sun is expected to last 5 billion years, and it ejected one-billionth-billionth of its mass, then that would be one-billionth-billionth of 5 billion years.
Two billions cancel leaving us one-billionth of 5 years or 200 millionths of a year which is about 1/6 of second.
When the sub is a red giant and is passing the orbit of Mercury in radius, and the oceans start boiling, we're gonna be begging and pleading for that sixth of a second I bet.
Happiness _does_ equate to productivity. At least for me. Sure free soda pop and doughnuts are nice. Sure a foozball table is nice. But those are just little perqs. What really makes me happy is challenging and interesting work that allows me to use my creativity and allows me to make a difference in the product I am working on. In that environment, I am extremely productive, working both smarter and harder.
The former might give a little morale boost, but without the latter, it's worthless. And anyone for whom it makes a significant difference probably doesn't have that much to offer anyway.
They are compensated for their work, just not with money. That's a hard concept for a devout capitalist to comprehend, I guess.
Perhaps, but you still can't exchange Whuffie for a Whopper and fries.
Of course, the real conpensation for writing free software is having the free software once you've written it.
I maintain a fairly modest, but powerful command-line file searching utility for Windows that I've developed over about 7 years. It has more options than ls and grep combined (well almost), each of which is usually traceable to something I wanted or needed at a particular time. It is what it is, because it does something I want and works the way it is.
I could attempt to sell it for $20 like 98% of the people who have written some stupid, near-useless VB utility in their lives have done, but what's the point? It's on SourceForge (look for RickLib, if you care). I wrote it for me, if someone paid me for it, I'd have to support it (and fix the occasional bug that still shows up). If someone can and wants to use it, let 'em.
Ultimately, I did it for me, the way I want, and I use it on a daily, even hourly basis, for all kinds of things.
The big OSS more ambitious projects ultimately are the same thing, people are writing software that they want to have and use. They are sharing it because that way others can help and gain from their work. It's very lower-case 'c' communist, but then again so was the early Christian church.
Don't forget Disney, who has stopped remaking old fairy tales (which isn't a bad thing) and is now making movie versions of their rides.
First, "Pirates of the Caribbean", now "Haunted Mansion", and coming in 2005 "Teacup Ride - The Movie" or maybe "Monorail"... "Adventure has a one track mind"
The thing about the superhero movies is that if they are done well, I think they are a rich source of good stories. Let's face it, all possible stories have been told. Only the details can be changed, and if you take something that has only existed in one medium and render it faithfully in another, you can have something good on your hands.
I can't wait to see "Iron Man" or "The Fantasic Four" done with today's technology... IF they are true to the originals. Far from just rehashing things, they can give you a cool new experience while still being very familiar. If you really want some new ideas, you'd better stick to books.
Of course, referring to the topic itself, I can't see anything interesting here. I might rent the thing when it comes out on video, but it sounds like a recipe for a lot of mindless action with no protagonists since the humans seem to be peripheral to the movie.
And of you don't like that... sooner or later we'll see "Independence Day 2: Aliens vs. the other aliens" wherein Jeff Goldblum saves the day using an iPod. Or maybe "E.T. vs. Alien" (now that I might go see), or perhaps "Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind: The skinny gray dudes vs. Aliens" or maybe "V vs. Newcomers: The Grudge Match" or how about the ultimate: "The Roddenbury/Lucas Cage Match - There Can Be Only One!"
Despite the fact that Microsoft Windows is intended for use by computer experts and novices alike, the true onus of security still falls on the user.
billg wants your technophobe grandmother to buy and learn to use a PC bundled with Windows (which is great), and yet it's up to her to be responsible for security issues and preventative actions she cannot hope to understand until she gains a certain amount of expertise (which is ludicrous)... the kind of expertise that Microsoft has been claiming for years people shouldn't have to have to use Windows software.
So essentially, if Microsoft writes crappy software from a security point of view, it's still the user's fault if his or her computer is compromised.
Good one, Bill. I know your business resume pretty well, and your accomplishments are impressive, if not the tactics used to acheive them, but then what _exactly_ are your technical credentials again?
Stop making excuses for your company's LACK of a software architecture. At the end of the day, programs that run on Window still essentially own the machine, and since Windows is exposed to the internet by virtue of its networking, that exposes tens of millions of users to fatal security flaws, most of which stem not from subtle bugs deep in the extremely complex operating system code, but fundamental flaws in the design of the software. It is not for nothing that Microsoft Office is nicknamed the Microsoft Virus Developer's Kit.
Admit your mistakes, and quit with the annual so-called commitments to stopping all work to address the quality of security that only seem to result in a higher number of critical errors found, but no overall gains in stability.
I'll give Microsoft credit for finding and fixing more critical flaws in their software, but I think they'll only deserve more respect when they stop _making_ so many critical mistakes in the first place.
Of course, billg, it's not a problem for you because I'm sure you have lots of sharp networking professionals to secure the company network against Outlook viruses and SQL Server worms and all the other garbage we poor peasants deal with on a monthly basis.
If every copy of Windows came with a dedicated and competent computer professional to install and maintain it, I'm sure very few of us would ever have serious problems with our computers, but if that's the case, then perhaps you should admit that Windows is not intended for non-technical users.
The value of liberal arts degrees and more general degrees of other kinds, is, unfortuately lost on most companies as well.
I don't think it is the idea of a BA itself that had created that negative reputation. In fact, a liberal arts degree used to be considered quite presigious. Bt the fact is that you're much less likely to get anywhere career-wise unless you have a "hard" degree like engineering, business or CS (or move on to something like an MBA, Law or Med school). "Well-rounded" often doesn't add much weight to a resume... although it should.
The fact is that this society (the U.S. anyway) doesn't value well-rounded individuals. We treat our teachers like crap, and then complain why there aren't many good ones. We decry the fact that so many Americans are work-a-holics, yet we create and tolerate an environment that fosters people to neglect everything but getting ahead. We often hold up as successes people who do one thing so well that they can make a lucrative living out of it despite being profoundly deficient in other aspects of life (sports figures, entertainers and politicians come to mind).
I do have a "hard" degree... in Computer Science, lo those many years ago. However, unlike many people in the field, I got into it because of interest and not as a good way to get a well-paying job. The fact of the matter is, I do not like my career and have hated most of my jobs despite having been pretty financially sucessful because of it. I have been unwilling to take a 1/2 salary cut to do something more rewarding and fulfilling because I have afforded my wife and kids a nice (not elegant) house and lifestyle.
I guess I have no one to blame but myself, although I am working on getting myself in a situation where I can do the programming that I love, get a decent salary, and be in a flexible enough situation where I can also pursue teaching, composing music, writing and those other things in life that are infinitely more rewarding (like church and family) than appeasing some no-nothing PHB by hacking code for a half-assed project that won't be half as good as it should be because no one wants to do things the right way.
I applaud your praise of critical thinking. In truth, a college degree should teach that above all else. The so-called "hard" degrees that I refer to are really more "training" than "education". I've seen people fake their way though a CS degree and come out with less skill than someone else with no formal education and a knack for logical thinking.
In fact, my favorite and most useful class in college was "Symbolic Logic" which was a Math/Philosophy class. While it was technical in nature, it also helped me to be a better critical thinker, which is a skill everyone needs in every field. I started out in Engineering, which I didn't like, but was initially afraid to switch to Arts and Sciences (where the CS department resided) for fear of being stuck taking a bunch of dull, pointless electives. In truth, the choice of electives in A&S was 10 times more interesting and valuable to me than in Engineering, and helped me
That's corporate life in the 21st century (and has been for a while). Loyalty is an outdated idea. Companies are showing less and less loyalty to employees, and employees are returning the favor.
As far as I'm concerned, the difference between being a full-time employee and a contractor boils down to compensation. Salaried employees trade a higher hourly rate for a fixed salary and additional non-monetary but quanitifiable benefits. Also, the government treats you differently for tax purposes. Period.
Anything else is above and beyond the call. The company will most likely lay the employee off in a heartbeat if they feel the need, and the employee will jump ship at a moment's notice for better pay or a more interesting job. Companies have forgotten how much more valuable a properly-trained and experienced senior employee can be, and employees have forgotten the less tangible benefits of staying with a firm for an extended period of time.
Like almost everyone else in modern American business, no real attention is being paid to the long-term. Only short-term gains are considered. An employee will bail for a 10% increase in pay, while a company will treat people like a commodity and swap them around and dump them for the slightest reason.
Unfortunately, in this climate, intangibles don't count for much, because you can't depend on loyalty being rewarded with loyalty. The companies are to blame when the concept of downsizing and commoditization of employees because more important than treating people like people. Now the shoe's on the other foot and employees aren't giving loyalty either, because they don't expect they will get it.
Unfortunately, the culture now is very much a mercenary culture, and it is stuck in a vicious circle being fed by things like frequent job changes, outsource overseas, the increasing reliance on temp workers, etc.
So, while the company doesn't _owe_ you anything more than a handshake and maybe a plaque (in addition to your salary), if they are wise, they will cultivate your obvious value, and you, in turn, should reciprocate, building a stronger and more valuable relationship.
In my case, I have at times, not shown as much loyalty as I maybe should have, because I am not a patient person, and am unwilling to suffer through a project of a year or more on the chance that the next one will be something I actually want to do. By the same token, I have been lied to, indirectly at least, and treated very unfairly on more than one occasion. The biggest problem I have had, as a long time (15+ years) expert developer that does not want to go into management, is being put in a situation more appropriate for a junior-level programmer, where I cannot utilize my expertise in a way that provides interest to me nor maximizes the company's benefit of my long years of experience. In my current job, I have literally been told nmy work is too good. If every piece of what I develop is not understandable by every programmer (at a shop that is light-weight on progammer talent), then it shouldn't be done that way. Given the impressive resume that I provide, wiuth its emphasis on improving the status quo, and developing sophisticated tools and solutions, it seems rather dishonest to state that I am a good match for the position, because after almost 6 months, I know I clearly am not. If and when I find alternative work, I will take it immediately, despite the fact that I hate to leave after such a short time, and yet, if the culture of the company (for which software development is of peripheral importance, as evidenced by the quotes "We are a bunch of hacks. This is a garage shop." They do brute-force, copy-and-paste work which would have looked archaic 10 years ago) had been described to me honestly, I would have realized it was a bad match up front. One thing I can be honest about is that I get bored easily and I am neither happy or productive when I am bored. I don't think it's fair to hire someone with 10+ years of C++ experience as a C++ p
They are supposed to switch to Access. Why do you think MS buys products that compete with its own? (Although to be honest they might have acquired FoxPro before Access existed.)
Actually, they probably acquired Access from someone else too. All I know is, I've found Access to be completely useless, except possibly as a DB browser. I find it easier and more reliable to just do everything through ODBC and SQL, but then I would never attempt to write forms or anything applike in Access either.
I'm sure X10 knows their assets and debts to the penny. It's just the poster who isn't sure... his point was that their debts are far larger than their assets, by an order of magnitude or more.
Also, at the risk of sounding pedantic: Since "order of magnitude" is a logarithmic scale, a half of an order of magnitide would be a factor of 3.16..., not 5.
The second range is actually over 2/3 an order of magnitude.
Slashdot Mirror
Source Depot isn't available to the general public though, correct?
Source Safe's real failure, in my experience, was that if you ever renamed or moved a file it would often completely lose the history for that file, often to the point of giving you garbage errors when you tried to get old versions.
So, based on the review the employees of Microsoft seemed to be of the opinion that Microsoft was good at a local leve but not good at a global level.
This is consistent with my long experience with Micrsoft development... some piece of Microsoft's software and tools are really good, others are bad, but never is there any kind of overarching consistency and philosophy. Even parts of Win32 itself aren't consistent with other parts... everything seems to be developed in a fairly isolated environment and crammed together at a higher level into a final product.
My own experience with an ex-Microsoft employee was very telling. I worked with him only briefly, and he was a really sharp guy who had worked on the NT kernel and SQL Server for several years. He had good ideas and a penchant for simplicity that seemed very un-Microsoft-like.
Interestingly, I learned some really interesting things about the Microsoft environment. The first was when I asked why "Internet Connection Sharing" and "RAS" were so buggy and bad. His reply was that the good people were all working on NAT for the server OS's. We repeated this conversation on several topics.
The other thing that was very telling was that MS does not use Source Safe in-house. No wonder... it's awful. Apparently thay have an in-house source control/configuration management solution which works much better... and yet they sell Source Safe.
From what I can tell as an outsider, the real genius of Microsoft is at these lower levels (and places like Microsoft Research) and that genius gets diluted or corrupted at a higher level of trying to integrate all the pieces of the world's largest software monopoly ^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h company.
This sounds like an interesting book.
Ouch! I've had that for months and you're the first person to catch it, including me!
That's my point.
I never said it was. Read it again.
I wouldn't call them stupid, but I also acknowledge they are fluff entertainment... just like Star Wars/ Just with 10 times better SFX, action, and acting (and that's saying a lot because the acting in the Matrix movies isn't very good at all).
I agree with you about "fanatics", but there's nothing wrong with watching a movie and really liking it. It's just like music... I can listen to and appreciate the most complex and sophisticated music there is, and yet I still like the Surf Punks. I guess I'm just not a snob.
In other words, he probably putting more work into modifying the original movies than he actually put into making the originals.
It's a shame he keeps trying to improve the original trilogy while completely screwing up on the new one.
... and Episode III will not be one tenth as cool as The Matrix Revolutions. Sorry, George. You blew it the second time around. If only you could have realized that while you are a visionary and perhaps even a decent writer, you are a lousy director.
abacusim?
abacodes?
abackeese?
I get the humor, but most of the Greens I've met are pretty tech-savvy. The joke does bring up the important question of how our techology needs to be tied into a larger ecological outlook, and then that brings up the question of where we are today versus where we should be going in terms of production, power-generation, and re-use, materials reclamation, and disposal.
I'm not surprised. Members of third parties tend to fall into two groups in my experience. The smaller of these groups is the total nutjobs, but I think most third-party people are intelligent people who think we should take the road less travelled and are willing to put their money where their mouths are. I may not agree with them or their ideas, but I have to respect their exercise of their principles. If more people were like this, we would not have a reason to be cynical of our two party system because there would be, more than rarely, a viable alternative.
Yeah, they probably lose that much money a day in wages spent for employees stuck with a blue screen of death.
I think the Green Party uses Stonehenge for all their computing needs. Either that or abaci made from trees knocked down by storms.
(Apologies to Terry Pratchett.)
...used to brag about all his downtime, but I think he meant something else...
Well, let's see, if the sun is expected to last 5 billion years, and it ejected one-billionth-billionth of its mass, then that would be one-billionth-billionth of 5 billion years.
Two billions cancel leaving us one-billionth of 5 years or 200 millionths of a year which is about 1/6 of second.
When the sub is a red giant and is passing the orbit of Mercury in radius, and the oceans start boiling, we're gonna be begging and pleading for that sixth of a second I bet.
Next question: Who can we sue?
Happiness _does_ equate to productivity. At least for me. Sure free soda pop and doughnuts are nice. Sure a foozball table is nice. But those are just little perqs. What really makes me happy is challenging and interesting work that allows me to use my creativity and allows me to make a difference in the product I am working on. In that environment, I am extremely productive, working both smarter and harder.
The former might give a little morale boost, but without the latter, it's worthless. And anyone for whom it makes a significant difference probably doesn't have that much to offer anyway.
They are compensated for their work, just not with money. That's a hard concept for a devout capitalist to comprehend, I guess.
Perhaps, but you still can't exchange Whuffie for a Whopper and fries.
Of course, the real conpensation for writing free software is having the free software once you've written it.
I maintain a fairly modest, but powerful command-line file searching utility for Windows that I've developed over about 7 years. It has more options than ls and grep combined (well almost), each of which is usually traceable to something I wanted or needed at a particular time. It is what it is, because it does something I want and works the way it is.
I could attempt to sell it for $20 like 98% of the people who have written some stupid, near-useless VB utility in their lives have done, but what's the point? It's on SourceForge (look for RickLib, if you care). I wrote it for me, if someone paid me for it, I'd have to support it (and fix the occasional bug that still shows up). If someone can and wants to use it, let 'em.
Ultimately, I did it for me, the way I want, and I use it on a daily, even hourly basis, for all kinds of things.
The big OSS more ambitious projects ultimately are the same thing, people are writing software that they want to have and use. They are sharing it because that way others can help and gain from their work. It's very lower-case 'c' communist, but then again so was the early Christian church.
Pretty radical stuff.
Oh, no!!! Global warming has broken the sun! Henny Penny, call your office!
I can't tell if you're joking or not. If you are it's pretty funny... but don't give the whackos any ideas.
If you're not joking...
Don't forget Disney, who has stopped remaking old fairy tales (which isn't a bad thing) and is now making movie versions of their rides.
First, "Pirates of the Caribbean", now "Haunted Mansion", and coming in 2005 "Teacup Ride - The Movie" or maybe "Monorail"... "Adventure has a one track mind"
The thing about the superhero movies is that if they are done well, I think they are a rich source of good stories. Let's face it, all possible stories have been told. Only the details can be changed, and if you take something that has only existed in one medium and render it faithfully in another, you can have something good on your hands.
I can't wait to see "Iron Man" or "The Fantasic Four" done with today's technology... IF they are true to the originals. Far from just rehashing things, they can give you a cool new experience while still being very familiar. If you really want some new ideas, you'd better stick to books.
Of course, referring to the topic itself, I can't see anything interesting here. I might rent the thing when it comes out on video, but it sounds like a recipe for a lot of mindless action with no protagonists since the humans seem to be peripheral to the movie.
And of you don't like that... sooner or later we'll see "Independence Day 2: Aliens vs. the other aliens" wherein Jeff Goldblum saves the day using an iPod. Or maybe "E.T. vs. Alien" (now that I might go see), or perhaps "Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind: The skinny gray dudes vs. Aliens" or maybe "V vs. Newcomers: The Grudge Match" or
how about the ultimate: "The Roddenbury/Lucas Cage Match - There Can Be Only One!"
Despite the fact that Microsoft Windows is intended for use by computer experts and novices alike, the true onus of security still falls on the user.
billg wants your technophobe grandmother to buy and learn to use a PC bundled with Windows (which is great), and yet it's up to her to be responsible for security issues and preventative actions she cannot hope to understand until she gains a certain amount of expertise (which is ludicrous)... the kind of expertise that Microsoft has been claiming for years people shouldn't have to have to use Windows software.
So essentially, if Microsoft writes crappy software from a security point of view, it's still the user's fault if his or her computer is compromised.
Good one, Bill. I know your business resume pretty well, and your accomplishments are impressive, if not the tactics used to acheive them, but then what _exactly_ are your technical credentials again?
Stop making excuses for your company's LACK of a software architecture. At the end of the day, programs that run on Window still essentially own the machine, and since Windows is exposed to the internet by virtue of its networking, that exposes tens of millions of users to fatal security flaws, most of which stem not from subtle bugs deep in the extremely complex operating system code, but fundamental flaws in the design of the software. It is not for nothing that Microsoft Office is nicknamed the Microsoft Virus Developer's Kit.
Admit your mistakes, and quit with the annual so-called commitments to stopping all work to address the quality of security that only seem to result in a higher number of critical errors found, but no overall gains in stability.
I'll give Microsoft credit for finding and fixing more critical flaws in their software, but I think they'll only deserve more respect when they stop _making_ so many critical mistakes in the first place.
Of course, billg, it's not a problem for you because I'm sure you have lots of sharp networking professionals to secure the company network against Outlook viruses and SQL Server worms and all the other garbage we poor peasants deal with on a monthly basis.
If every copy of Windows came with a dedicated and competent computer professional to install and maintain it, I'm sure very few of us would ever have serious problems with our computers, but if that's the case, then perhaps you should admit that Windows is not intended for non-technical users.
Maybe those people should just use Macs.
Nobody's taking away the thousand or so CD's I have now. Not to mention my several computers and other devices that can play or rip them.
Let the MS's and the RIAA's of the world impose their tyrrany. I'll still be able to do what I want.
I, for one, don't welcome our new media overlords.
That happened to back in 1966. Didn't you read it in the papers?
That was the same week that Weekly World News ran the story about the voice-activated typewriter being developed in secret by the government.
The value of liberal arts degrees and more general degrees of other kinds, is, unfortuately lost on most companies as well.
I don't think it is the idea of a BA itself that had created that negative reputation. In fact, a liberal arts degree used to be considered quite presigious. Bt the fact is that you're much less likely to get anywhere career-wise unless you have a "hard" degree like engineering, business or CS (or move on to something like an MBA, Law or Med school). "Well-rounded" often doesn't add much weight to a resume... although it should.
The fact is that this society (the U.S. anyway) doesn't value well-rounded individuals. We treat our teachers like crap, and then complain why there aren't many good ones. We decry the fact that so many Americans are work-a-holics, yet we create and tolerate an environment that fosters people to neglect everything but getting ahead. We often hold up as successes people who do one thing so well that they can make a lucrative living out of it despite being profoundly deficient in other aspects of life (sports figures, entertainers and politicians come to mind).
I do have a "hard" degree... in Computer Science, lo those many years ago. However, unlike many people in the field, I got into it because of interest and not as a good way to get a well-paying job. The fact of the matter is, I do not like my career and have hated most of my jobs despite having been pretty financially sucessful because of it. I have been unwilling to take a 1/2 salary cut to do something more rewarding and fulfilling because I have afforded my wife and kids a nice (not elegant) house and lifestyle.
I guess I have no one to blame but myself, although I am working on getting myself in a situation where I can do the programming that I love, get a decent salary, and be in a flexible enough situation where I can also pursue teaching, composing music, writing and those other things in life that are infinitely more rewarding (like church and family) than appeasing some no-nothing PHB by hacking code for a half-assed project that won't be half as good as it should be because no one wants to do things the right way.
I applaud your praise of critical thinking. In truth, a college degree should teach that above all else. The so-called "hard" degrees that I refer to are really more "training" than "education". I've seen people fake their way though a CS degree and come out with less skill than someone else with no formal education and a knack for logical thinking.
In fact, my favorite and most useful class in college was "Symbolic Logic" which was a Math/Philosophy class. While it was technical in nature, it also helped me to be a better critical thinker, which is a skill everyone needs in every field. I started out in Engineering, which I didn't like, but was initially afraid to switch to Arts and Sciences (where the CS department resided) for fear of being stuck taking a bunch of dull, pointless electives. In truth, the choice of electives in A&S was 10 times more interesting and valuable to me than in Engineering, and helped me
That's corporate life in the 21st century (and has been for a while). Loyalty is an outdated idea. Companies are showing less and less loyalty to employees, and employees are returning the favor.
As far as I'm concerned, the difference between being a full-time employee and a contractor boils down to compensation. Salaried employees trade a higher hourly rate for a fixed salary and additional non-monetary but quanitifiable benefits. Also, the government treats you differently for tax purposes. Period.
Anything else is above and beyond the call. The company will most likely lay the employee off in a heartbeat if they feel the need, and the employee will jump ship at a moment's notice for better pay or a more interesting job. Companies have forgotten how much more valuable a properly-trained and experienced senior employee can be, and employees have forgotten the less tangible benefits of staying with a firm for an extended period of time.
Like almost everyone else in modern American business, no real attention is being paid to the long-term. Only short-term gains are considered. An employee will bail for a 10% increase in pay, while a company will treat people like a commodity and swap them around and dump them for the slightest reason.
Unfortunately, in this climate, intangibles don't count for much, because you can't depend on loyalty being rewarded with loyalty. The companies are to blame when the concept of downsizing and commoditization of employees because more important than treating people like people. Now the shoe's on the other foot and employees aren't giving loyalty either, because they don't expect they will get it.
Unfortunately, the culture now is very much a mercenary culture, and it is stuck in a vicious circle being fed by things like frequent job changes, outsource overseas, the increasing reliance on temp workers, etc.
So, while the company doesn't _owe_ you anything more than a handshake and maybe a plaque (in addition to your salary), if they are wise, they will cultivate your obvious value, and you, in turn, should reciprocate, building a stronger and more valuable relationship.
In my case, I have at times, not shown as much loyalty as I maybe should have, because I am not a patient person, and am unwilling to suffer through a project of a year or more on the chance that the next one will be something I actually want to do. By the same token, I have been lied to, indirectly at least, and treated very unfairly on more than one occasion. The biggest problem I have had, as a long time (15+ years) expert developer that does not want to go into management, is being put in a situation more appropriate for a junior-level programmer, where I cannot utilize my expertise in a way that provides interest to me nor maximizes the company's benefit of my long years of experience. In my current job, I have literally been told nmy work is too good. If every piece of what I develop is not understandable by every programmer (at a shop that is light-weight on progammer talent), then it shouldn't be done that way. Given the impressive resume that I provide, wiuth its emphasis on improving the status quo, and developing sophisticated tools and solutions, it seems rather dishonest to state that I am a good match for the position, because after almost 6 months, I know I clearly am not. If and when I find alternative work, I will take it immediately, despite the fact that I hate to leave after such a short time, and yet, if the culture of the company (for which software development is of peripheral importance, as evidenced by the quotes "We are a bunch of hacks. This is a garage shop." They do brute-force, copy-and-paste work which would have looked archaic 10 years ago) had been described to me honestly, I would have realized it was a bad match up front. One thing I can be honest about is that I get bored easily and I am neither happy or productive when I am bored. I don't think it's fair to hire someone with 10+ years of C++ experience as a C++ p
Exactly as planned.
They are supposed to switch to Access. Why do you think MS buys products that compete with its own? (Although to be honest they might have acquired FoxPro before Access existed.)
Actually, they probably acquired Access from someone else too. All I know is, I've found Access to be completely useless, except possibly as a DB browser. I find it easier and more reliable to just do everything through ODBC and SQL, but then I would never attempt to write forms or anything applike in Access either.
I'm sure X10 knows their assets and debts to the penny. It's just the poster who isn't sure... his point was that their debts are far larger than their assets, by an order of magnitude or more.
Also, at the risk of sounding pedantic: Since "order of magnitude" is a logarithmic scale, a half of an order of magnitide would be a factor of 3.16..., not 5.
The second range is actually over 2/3 an order of magnitude.