Great question. It seems to me you can go one of two ways. Either change the rules that constrict how government agencies are forced to do business or build something from the ground up that conforms to how they do business now. A monumental challenge no matter which way you go. Could the Air Force have built a 100% custom ERP-like system for $1B? Maybe, it's difficult to say. What is certain is that they would have at least something usable after 10 years, which is more than they can claim now.
Changing the procurement rules....well that's pretty hard to do too. Now you have to get Congress involved and we've seen how swiftly things work there. Part of the problem is that only a very few companies can even BID on a project of that size, and it's the same old players (Northrup Grummond, IBM, Ascenture, etc.) that got them in trouble in the first place.
I don't want to come off as anti-government here. I've worked with government clients before and they are doing a very difficult job and have little flexibility. Most of them are overworked and underpaid. Heck, if I had all the answers I'd already be rich. Instead I'm just workin' for the man:-)
Personally I think the best way to go is to create a modern, web based system specific to government requirements. Do all your integrations with XML, that way you can plug into just about any third party system will little or no problem. These off the shelf ERP systems just don't seem to have been designed for Federal requirements. State and Local governments, sure, but Federal...that's another issue all together.
Yes and that might account for the high failure rate for ERP projects at the federal level. You make a very good point. What I wonder is why, knowing all of this, are ERP systems selected in the first place? Square peg round hole.
One of the main reasons that companies put in ERP systems in the first place is to comply with regulatory requirements, primarily around auditing and reporting. These systems are designed to do that. That's why they come delivered with best practice processes for things like HR, Financials, etc. It can be configured in a multitude of ways to suit just about any organization.
"But demanding everybody adapt to fit your vision of how things should work is just about the height of arrogance" - First of all, I don't demand anyone to do anything. I'm there to help them. If they want me to customize it, I'll customize it. I simply point out to them the hidden costs of doing so.....increased time and effort up front and increased time and effort for every upgrade they will do. At the end of the day it's their software and I'll do what they ask me to do. Secondly, it's not my vision of how things should work. Talk to any seasoned ERP consultant and they will tell you the same thing. Generally speaking you are better off not customizing the software unless you have no other option. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
"You'd probably have more success with your rollouts if you focused on understanding them up front and working with them, Instead of demanding that the entire rest of the world change to fit your preconceived notions" - I've got a very high success rate, thanks for asking. I have been doing this for a very long time and I bring a considerable amount of experience to the table. That's why people hire me. When I tell my customers what I said above I do it because I want to help them avoid pitfalls that I have seen many times before. I'm not doing it because I want to milk them for more money or make them keep me longer. I'm doing it because I have a professional obligation to advise them on what I think is best for them. And I spend a considerable amount of time taking with their business stakeholders before I offer any advice at all.
"and will not listen because they don't have to" - You just hit the nail on the head sir. The key to any successful ERP implementation is getting buy in from the top down. In other words, the executives support it and will make sure that the people reporting to them are on board too. Otherwise we get what you just described.
That's been my experience too. I call it the building block approach. Often what I hear though is that Phase 2 never comes. The money dries up. So management is in a rush to jam everything into Phase 1 because they worry that it will never get implemented otherwise. This is what happens when companies fail to take the long term approach.
Bullshit. I have been involved in dozens of ERP implementations over the years. The software works. When implementations fail it is always, in my experience, because of the people (i.e. management) making the decisions on how to implement the product.
Me: "Let me show you how Product X handles Accounts Payable" Client: "That's not how we do it" Me: "This might be a good opportunity to take a look at your current business practices and see if they can be done in a more efficient way" Client: "But we've always done it this way" Me: "Why?" Client "Dunno...just always have. And I doubt that the team is willing to change" Me: "Ok, we can customize the product to make it work the way you want but it's going to take more time and money. And when you do an upgrade later on there will be implications as well" Client: "Fine. Just make it work the way we do it now"
And so it goes. Time and again I see clients go out and buy an expensive ERP system only to customize the bejezus out of it to make it look exactly like the systems they are retiring. They are not open to better business practices. Too many political headwinds.
What does this say about these clowns in the Air Force? It takes them 10 years and $1.03B to realize that the project is going to fail? On an original budget of $88M? One of the big problems with trying to shoehorn a best practice ERP system into a large government institution is that often they employ worst practices. They won't, or can't, change them so you have to end up rewriting the product to fit their ass backwards ways. The whole purpose of implementing an ERP system is to replace aging, stove-piped systems with modern integrated systems. It can work well if it's implemented properly and the right decisions are made along the way. But it's not a magic pill.
I hope that other companies are paying attention to this. To me, unwanted texts are particularly annoying. I'm already used to finding dead tree junk mail in my mailbox and junk email but there is something about junk texts that just seems... sleazy. News flash Papa...if I want to order a pie I know where to find you. No need to spam me with junk texts. Maybe the problem is that in order to receive text messages I have to pay for them, unlike email and tree mail.
If they get hit with the $250M fine we all know what will happen...low paid pizza workers will get laid off. Law firm gets rich(er). Consumer ends up getting the award in the form of a coupon for the next Papa John's pizza. The only positive outcome will be if other companies see this and decide not to follow that path.
Yeah, there seems to be a pattern here. Low cost reduces quality. I see it all the time in the software consulting business. Companies scramble to find cheap offshore workers and the code you get back is shit. We end up fixing it on our end before it ever goes into production. But management doesn't seem to count that added cost.
Interesting post. I'm not a pilot but I do fly a lot (as a passenger - business travel). In my view pilot salaries are shockingly low. Anyone piloting a 757 or an A320 has a lot of flying experience. A lot. That takes a lot of time and money to acquire. Compare that to an engineer or IT professional with similar experience.
I might be in the minority here but I think that low airfares are actually part of the problem. Look what it has given us...baggage and other fees, fewer routes, lower salaries for the people that work at the airlines. Airlines, in an attempt to keep fares low and continuing to squeeze every cent they can get. Air travel used to be a pleasurable experience back in the day. Now it's just a sardine can in the sky. I, for one, would be happy to pay more for better service. But all we hear about are low fares. Sure, that's fine if you're taking a once a year family vacation. You put up with it. But for someone that flies a lot you really notice the nickel and dimeing.
My hope is that airlines will pay their people what they deserve and give passengers what they deserve and charge what is necessary to make that all possible.
So basically what the Virginia BOE is saying is that if you are "asian" you are smarter than "white" kids who, in turn, are smarter than "hispanic" and "black" kids. Therefore, the white hispanic and black kids need a helping hand to put them on level ground with those asian kids. What a load of shit. This sets race relations back about 50 years in my estimation. The reason that asian kids tend to do better in math and science is not because they are asian it's due to cultural reasons. Asian families tend to put a greater value on education and a generally strong work ethic drives the children to excel at school. Basically they tend to do better because they tend work harder.
This immediately casts all white, hispanic and black kids as second class citizens in the Virginia school system. "Oh....you got one of those Hispanic diplomas...we'll be in touch....".
If you're in IT then consulting is the only way to go. Companies treat employees like shit for the most part. No pension. Minimal training. Minimal job security. I've been consulting for 14 years and there is no way I'd go back to working for a company. I get paid what the market will bear. When I need some training I get some books and teach myself. Beats having to kiss some manager's ass to get sent on a training course. Oh, and if you leave within 2 years they expect you to pay back a prorated portion of the cost.
When you consult you get to work on the stuff YOU want to work on, not what some stuffed shirt in the board room tells you to do. You think that guy gives a shit about your career? Guess what Sparky, he doesn't. All he cares about is making his numbers and getting his bonus and moving the real work along to someone else's inbox. You, as an employee, are a pawn. A serf. A peon. You are an eyelash away from being outsourced to some guy in India working for $2/hr. And when it comes time to let you go your boss will do it without an ounce of regret. Your boss doesn't give a shit about you. HR doesn't give a shit about you.
When someone hires me I go in, I do the job, I leave. If they like me they ask me to come back and do it again. I don't have to get caught up in any internal politics. I don't have to schmooze with managers that I generally don't like and don't trust. I work with other techs. I code because I think it's fun and challenging and rewarding. All the other office crap, I have no time for. I don't have to put up with it. And neither do you.
Typical corporate jackass. Trying to throw around his (considerable) weight with veiled threats. Yeah, donut boy, I'm sure the memo leaker is just quivering in his boots right about now. If you were a Cisco employee what would you be thinking right about now? I know what I'd be thinking. I'd be thinking I'm not going to work for an idiot like that. Maybe donut boy still thinks he's in the CIA. Maybe he gets off on stupid little power trips. Maybe his wife treats him like shit and the only way he can get back is to take it out on the people he works with. Maybe he's just a fucking loser.
It's not so much that Samsung makes a better phone (although I have one and I really like it). The Android OS is much more prevalent than iOS so it stands to reason that there will be more phones out there running Android than running iOS. I have owned both and Apple also makes a very nice phone. But for me - feature for feature - the Galaxy is the winner. Android is more open and you can do more with it. Apple is more closed but it's easier to use. Different strokes for different folks.
I think that there are lot of other good android phones out there but they are losing steam. HTC is not doing well for example. Samsung now has the reputation, and rightly so, that they make the best android phone. The fact that it costs the same as the iPhone is no small feat of accomplishment, given Apple's popularity. Most everyone else feels the need to undercut Apple on price to be competitive.
From what I understand, the iPhone is more profitable than any other phone so that should not be overlooked. In the long run that might make a difference. Microsoft doesn't seem to be getting much traction yet with their phone but it's new and that could change. RIM and Nokia seem to be on a steady downslide. So it might end up being a two horse race in the phone world. I'm not sure that is a good thing.
First of all, what is this idiot doing carrying around nude pictures of herself on her cellphone? A lot of phones get lost or stolen. Nice way to set yourself up for a blackmail attempt. Secondly, don't you think it might be a good idea to get rid of such photos before going in to get a new phone? Those devices that are used to copy data from one phone to another...how do you know that the data isn't copied somewhere other than your new phone? Short answer...you don't.
It just astounds me how careless some people are with cellphones. If you want to keep nudie pics on your phone, fine, but don't be surprised when it falls into the wrong hands. I was at the airport a few weeks ago and some lady sitting across from just gets up and leaves. She leaves her MacBook and iPhone and luggage just sitting on the chair. A few minutes later she comes back with a magazine. Anyone could have just swept in and stole all of it. Then she would have been moaning about being a victim of a crime. She's a victim alright...a victim of her own stupidity.
This is just a sign of the times, of course. A time when people are no longer held accountable for their own mistakes and misjudgments. Take out a loan that everyone, including you, knows you can't repay? Blame the bank. Drive around with a scalding hot cup of coffee between your legs? Blame McDonalds. Your kid is doing poorly at school? Blame the teacher.
Heaven forbid that people might actually take accountability for their own actions. If you take your cellphone into the store with nude pictures of yourself on it and some kid working there sees them then you are a fucking moron and deserve to be humiliated. End of story.
And what would you have us do? Do you think we should continue down the same path? The social welfare state, although well intended, has clearly not eliminated poverty in America. It hasn't even reduced it in any meaningful way. I'm not suggesting we get rid of it I'm suggesting we have a discussion about how to improve it. A meaningful discussion. One without, you know, snide remarks like the one below.
"I'm sure your great insight would solve global poverty instantly." - Global poverty is a much different issue. I have visited third world countries. Have you? I have seen grinding poverty up close and personal. It's enough to bring tears to your eyes. Trust me, it's nothing like people here living in "assisted housing". Their challenges are much more basic - clean drinking water, proper sanitation, disease, lack of access to education. These are issues that we thankfully don't have to face in America. We are fortunate. We have lots of drinking water. We produce more food than we need. Children have access to public education.
Nobody is going to solve global poverty instantly - even an "expert assessor" like me;-)
I think that the Gates Foundation is making great strides though. He is looking at charitable giving in a much different way, taking a more active role in where his money goes and how it is spent. He is expecting to see progress...and I believe he is. He realizes the magnitude of the problem and sees success more in making targeted gains on specific problems. It's a start.
I would add that the advantage Android has is in sheer numbers. It's by far the most used mobile OS so you've got a bigger audience to sell to. iOS is not far behind. Win8 is a distant, distant forth (behind even Blackberry I would guess). If I'm trying to make a living selling mobile apps you can bet I would be hitching a ride on either Android or iOS. Microsoft is going to have to show me that they have the vision to stick with a plan all the way through. Their recent history has not looked encouraging in that respect.
I'm not a Microsoft developer but haven't we been down this path before with the above technologies? I recall a heavy emphasis on silverlight only to mothball it not long after. if I'm going to write Apps for someone I want some stability and recent history shows that Microsoft has not provided that to their developers.
We love to build up and tear down. Not long ago the press is gushing over Apple. Talking about how their stock it going to $1000 a share. Now they are calling for people's heads. Sure, the Maps thing was a bit of a fiasco but it's not as if it doesn't work at all or the App crashes. From what I understand it's a few places that are not done well. The rest seems to work fine. Remember, Google's map app wasn't very good when it started either.
The problem was the way it was rolled out. It should have been presented as a Beta, not a ready-for-prime-time App. Cook had no choice, he had to do something to save face. I'm not sure how much, if any, blame he shares in this but clearly heads must roll and roll they did.
Apple has had a lot of hits and are under tremendous pressure to keep it up. Android has caught up on features, some might say they have surpassed the iPhone. What Apple still has going for it is a rabid fan base and a reputation for quality hardware. Another slip up could cost them dearly. Time will tell.
In the 3rd world this is the model for how education will be done in the future. How many Stanford professors would be willing to travel in person to the African continent to conduct lectures? Not many I'm willing to bet. But prerecorded lectures could be easily available on cheap tablet computers. The main problems with university education is logistics (you have to travel to the class) and cost (it's too expensive - even for 1st world students). Prerecorded lectures are not ideal but they are a heck of a lot better than what is available to them now. And they can be delivered 1000 times cheaper than in person lectures.
Because of the unions, and the political implications of campaign contributions, this is going to be difficult tower to topple. Universities are already starting to provide distance learning, partly to keep up with places like University of Phoenix and partly because of the sheer economics of it. Recorded lectures are way, way cheaper to provide. Eventually it will be like the news broadcasts - you have attractive actors reading from scripts. Presentation will become more important than content and content will become a commodity. One day you might see professors working as independent contractors and selling lectures by the download.
However, as someone that has worked in Higher Ed I can tell you that things change there very slowly. If they are not careful the new technology will simply leapfrog over them.
Well, poverty is a very complex problem. Yes, it's partly due to inequality but it's also partly due to lack of drive or willpower. I can't think of a country where more opportunity exists than in America. In many countries poverty is due mainly to lack of opportunity. If you were not born into a wealthy family you have little or no chance of every escaping poverty. Not so in America. There are many, many people that have risen from poverty to become wealthy beyond their wildest dreams. More still that have risen from poverty to enjoy a good middle class standard of living.
Some people, even if you hand them opportunity on a silver platter, will not take it. Maybe they lack the intellectual capacity to see opportunities when they arise. Maybe they make bad choices. Maybe they just don't give a shit. For some people, maybe they are happy with their lot in life and don't worry about not having a lot of material things.
As far as "fighting poverty" goes, how do you fight it if nobody really knows how to cure it? Clearly throwing more money at the problem has not worked. I'm not suggesting that we abandon the poor. Society has an obligation to take care of people that can't take care of themselves. The key word there is "can't". I don't believe that society has any obligation to take care of people that WON'T take care of themselves. If they have problems with drugs or alcohol, fine, let's get them some help. But there will always be a small portion of the population that is perfectly able to work and support themselves but have decided, for whatever reason, that they just don't want to. For those I offer no sympathy.
This is a typically American problem - the notion that you can simply throw money at problems and they will go away. The war on poverty has met the same fate. We have essentially the same proportion of people below the poverty line today as we did in LBJ's time despite spending massive amounts of money on it.
If you are a teacher where would you rather work? In a nice, safe suburban school or a dangerous underfunded urban school? The fact that the suburban school also has more money only exacerbates the problem even further since the money that schools get is largely based on the tax base. Neighborhoods with big expensive homes pay more property tax and the schools there get more money. And tend to attract better teachers. So if you are a parent the goal is to move to one of those neighborhoods so that your kid can attend one of those schools. And the cycle continues.
CIO's and other high level executives didn't get to where they are by taking big risks. They are generally very conservative and play it by the book. When the time comes to make a big decision like infrastructure or database or enterprise software they are not going to make that decision unilaterally, even if they are perfectly capable of making it themselves. They are going to bring in "experts", the ones you refer to as high paid consultants, and have them conduct studies and analysis and come up with a recommendation. The CIO will then almost certainly follow that recommendation. Why? Because if something goes wrong he hasn't put his neck out on the line. He has taken the prudent step of bringing in experts and is following their opinions.
Consultants are not necessarily any smarter than anyone else but they often have the advantage of specializing in a given field. When you hire them they can focus on a single task and not get drawn into office politics or have to split their time amongst several projects at once. Sure, some of them are lousy...just like there are lousy doctors and lousy carpenters and lousy hairdressers. But in business appearing to do the right thing is often as important as doing the right thing.
It's the same reason that many companies go the "packaged software" route, rather than develop it in house. If something goes wrong you pick up the phone and report the problem and the vendor is on the hook to fix it. If you build it in house and your lead programmer quits the next day then what do you do?
But times are changing. For many of the Web 2.0 companies (Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) buying packaged software like Oracle is prohibitively expensive when you are starting out. So they use MySQL or Postgre SQL and they are very, very good products. In the right hands they can be just as good as anything from Oracle or Microsoft. It allows them to focus capital on other things and bring ideas to market without incurring extra debt. It's a smart move and it has been proven to be as scalable as anything else out there.
what if the paradigm changes and instead of the tablet being vertical they are horizontal? It could be a big flat surface built into the desk where the touch interaction is done there and the results displayed on a vertical monitor. Kind of like how it's done on CSI or Hawaii 5-0. Whatever you want to have displayed on the monitor you simply flick it towards the screen with a touch gesture, similar to how applications are closed on WebOS. Maybe the display is actually your big screen TV that is connected to your tablet via WiFi or BluTooth. Now THAT would be cool.
But if it's the current configuration of the horizontal monitor then holding your arm up like that all day is going to get tiring.
It seems to me that many of the people that now use Linux/OSX/Android/iOS are doing it precisely because they DON'T want to use MicroSoft products. All of the aforementioned systems work just fine without any assistance from MS. Ok, so MS has a new OS and a new tablet. That's great if you're looking to stay in that ecosystem. But if you're using one of the other operating systems why in the world would you want to change?
I use a Mac and an Android phone and tablet. I've got a Windows VM on my Mac and haven't had to use it in probably a year. But I keep in around just in case. The phone and tablet work great. I've got tons of apps to choose from and I can do anything I want with it. Windows 8 and their shiny new tablet do no excite me in the least. I'm happy with what I've got.
Slashdot Mirror
Great question. It seems to me you can go one of two ways. Either change the rules that constrict how government agencies are forced to do business or build something from the ground up that conforms to how they do business now. A monumental challenge no matter which way you go. Could the Air Force have built a 100% custom ERP-like system for $1B? Maybe, it's difficult to say. What is certain is that they would have at least something usable after 10 years, which is more than they can claim now.
Changing the procurement rules....well that's pretty hard to do too. Now you have to get Congress involved and we've seen how swiftly things work there. Part of the problem is that only a very few companies can even BID on a project of that size, and it's the same old players (Northrup Grummond, IBM, Ascenture, etc.) that got them in trouble in the first place.
I don't want to come off as anti-government here. I've worked with government clients before and they are doing a very difficult job and have little flexibility. Most of them are overworked and underpaid. Heck, if I had all the answers I'd already be rich. Instead I'm just workin' for the man :-)
Personally I think the best way to go is to create a modern, web based system specific to government requirements. Do all your integrations with XML, that way you can plug into just about any third party system will little or no problem. These off the shelf ERP systems just don't seem to have been designed for Federal requirements. State and Local governments, sure, but Federal...that's another issue all together.
Yes and that might account for the high failure rate for ERP projects at the federal level. You make a very good point. What I wonder is why, knowing all of this, are ERP systems selected in the first place? Square peg round hole.
One of the main reasons that companies put in ERP systems in the first place is to comply with regulatory requirements, primarily around auditing and reporting. These systems are designed to do that. That's why they come delivered with best practice processes for things like HR, Financials, etc. It can be configured in a multitude of ways to suit just about any organization.
"But demanding everybody adapt to fit your vision of how things should work is just about the height of arrogance" - First of all, I don't demand anyone to do anything. I'm there to help them. If they want me to customize it, I'll customize it. I simply point out to them the hidden costs of doing so.....increased time and effort up front and increased time and effort for every upgrade they will do. At the end of the day it's their software and I'll do what they ask me to do. Secondly, it's not my vision of how things should work. Talk to any seasoned ERP consultant and they will tell you the same thing. Generally speaking you are better off not customizing the software unless you have no other option. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
"You'd probably have more success with your rollouts if you focused on understanding them up front and working with them, Instead of demanding that the entire rest of the world change to fit your preconceived notions" - I've got a very high success rate, thanks for asking. I have been doing this for a very long time and I bring a considerable amount of experience to the table. That's why people hire me. When I tell my customers what I said above I do it because I want to help them avoid pitfalls that I have seen many times before. I'm not doing it because I want to milk them for more money or make them keep me longer. I'm doing it because I have a professional obligation to advise them on what I think is best for them. And I spend a considerable amount of time taking with their business stakeholders before I offer any advice at all.
"and will not listen because they don't have to" - You just hit the nail on the head sir. The key to any successful ERP implementation is getting buy in from the top down. In other words, the executives support it and will make sure that the people reporting to them are on board too. Otherwise we get what you just described.
That's been my experience too. I call it the building block approach. Often what I hear though is that Phase 2 never comes. The money dries up. So management is in a rush to jam everything into Phase 1 because they worry that it will never get implemented otherwise. This is what happens when companies fail to take the long term approach.
Bravo! Best post I've read on this thread.
Bullshit. I have been involved in dozens of ERP implementations over the years. The software works. When implementations fail it is always, in my experience, because of the people (i.e. management) making the decisions on how to implement the product.
Me: "Let me show you how Product X handles Accounts Payable"
Client: "That's not how we do it"
Me: "This might be a good opportunity to take a look at your current business practices and see if they can be done in a more efficient way"
Client: "But we've always done it this way"
Me: "Why?"
Client "Dunno...just always have. And I doubt that the team is willing to change"
Me: "Ok, we can customize the product to make it work the way you want but it's going to take more time and money. And when you do an upgrade later on there will be implications as well"
Client: "Fine. Just make it work the way we do it now"
And so it goes. Time and again I see clients go out and buy an expensive ERP system only to customize the bejezus out of it to make it look exactly like the systems they are retiring. They are not open to better business practices. Too many political headwinds.
What does this say about these clowns in the Air Force? It takes them 10 years and $1.03B to realize that the project is going to fail? On an original budget of $88M? One of the big problems with trying to shoehorn a best practice ERP system into a large government institution is that often they employ worst practices. They won't, or can't, change them so you have to end up rewriting the product to fit their ass backwards ways. The whole purpose of implementing an ERP system is to replace aging, stove-piped systems with modern integrated systems. It can work well if it's implemented properly and the right decisions are made along the way. But it's not a magic pill.
I hope that other companies are paying attention to this. To me, unwanted texts are particularly annoying. I'm already used to finding dead tree junk mail in my mailbox and junk email but there is something about junk texts that just seems... sleazy. News flash Papa...if I want to order a pie I know where to find you. No need to spam me with junk texts. Maybe the problem is that in order to receive text messages I have to pay for them, unlike email and tree mail.
If they get hit with the $250M fine we all know what will happen...low paid pizza workers will get laid off. Law firm gets rich(er). Consumer ends up getting the award in the form of a coupon for the next Papa John's pizza. The only positive outcome will be if other companies see this and decide not to follow that path.
Yeah, there seems to be a pattern here. Low cost reduces quality. I see it all the time in the software consulting business. Companies scramble to find cheap offshore workers and the code you get back is shit. We end up fixing it on our end before it ever goes into production. But management doesn't seem to count that added cost.
Interesting post. I'm not a pilot but I do fly a lot (as a passenger - business travel). In my view pilot salaries are shockingly low. Anyone piloting a 757 or an A320 has a lot of flying experience. A lot. That takes a lot of time and money to acquire. Compare that to an engineer or IT professional with similar experience.
I might be in the minority here but I think that low airfares are actually part of the problem. Look what it has given us...baggage and other fees, fewer routes, lower salaries for the people that work at the airlines. Airlines, in an attempt to keep fares low and continuing to squeeze every cent they can get. Air travel used to be a pleasurable experience back in the day. Now it's just a sardine can in the sky. I, for one, would be happy to pay more for better service. But all we hear about are low fares. Sure, that's fine if you're taking a once a year family vacation. You put up with it. But for someone that flies a lot you really notice the nickel and dimeing.
My hope is that airlines will pay their people what they deserve and give passengers what they deserve and charge what is necessary to make that all possible.
So basically what the Virginia BOE is saying is that if you are "asian" you are smarter than "white" kids who, in turn, are smarter than "hispanic" and "black" kids. Therefore, the white hispanic and black kids need a helping hand to put them on level ground with those asian kids. What a load of shit. This sets race relations back about 50 years in my estimation. The reason that asian kids tend to do better in math and science is not because they are asian it's due to cultural reasons. Asian families tend to put a greater value on education and a generally strong work ethic drives the children to excel at school. Basically they tend to do better because they tend work harder.
This immediately casts all white, hispanic and black kids as second class citizens in the Virginia school system. "Oh....you got one of those Hispanic diplomas...we'll be in touch....".
If you're in IT then consulting is the only way to go. Companies treat employees like shit for the most part. No pension. Minimal training. Minimal job security. I've been consulting for 14 years and there is no way I'd go back to working for a company. I get paid what the market will bear. When I need some training I get some books and teach myself. Beats having to kiss some manager's ass to get sent on a training course. Oh, and if you leave within 2 years they expect you to pay back a prorated portion of the cost.
When you consult you get to work on the stuff YOU want to work on, not what some stuffed shirt in the board room tells you to do. You think that guy gives a shit about your career? Guess what Sparky, he doesn't. All he cares about is making his numbers and getting his bonus and moving the real work along to someone else's inbox. You, as an employee, are a pawn. A serf. A peon. You are an eyelash away from being outsourced to some guy in India working for $2/hr. And when it comes time to let you go your boss will do it without an ounce of regret. Your boss doesn't give a shit about you. HR doesn't give a shit about you.
When someone hires me I go in, I do the job, I leave. If they like me they ask me to come back and do it again. I don't have to get caught up in any internal politics. I don't have to schmooze with managers that I generally don't like and don't trust. I work with other techs. I code because I think it's fun and challenging and rewarding. All the other office crap, I have no time for. I don't have to put up with it. And neither do you.
Typical corporate jackass. Trying to throw around his (considerable) weight with veiled threats. Yeah, donut boy, I'm sure the memo leaker is just quivering in his boots right about now. If you were a Cisco employee what would you be thinking right about now? I know what I'd be thinking. I'd be thinking I'm not going to work for an idiot like that. Maybe donut boy still thinks he's in the CIA. Maybe he gets off on stupid little power trips. Maybe his wife treats him like shit and the only way he can get back is to take it out on the people he works with. Maybe he's just a fucking loser.
It's not so much that Samsung makes a better phone (although I have one and I really like it). The Android OS is much more prevalent than iOS so it stands to reason that there will be more phones out there running Android than running iOS. I have owned both and Apple also makes a very nice phone. But for me - feature for feature - the Galaxy is the winner. Android is more open and you can do more with it. Apple is more closed but it's easier to use. Different strokes for different folks.
I think that there are lot of other good android phones out there but they are losing steam. HTC is not doing well for example. Samsung now has the reputation, and rightly so, that they make the best android phone. The fact that it costs the same as the iPhone is no small feat of accomplishment, given Apple's popularity. Most everyone else feels the need to undercut Apple on price to be competitive.
From what I understand, the iPhone is more profitable than any other phone so that should not be overlooked. In the long run that might make a difference. Microsoft doesn't seem to be getting much traction yet with their phone but it's new and that could change. RIM and Nokia seem to be on a steady downslide. So it might end up being a two horse race in the phone world. I'm not sure that is a good thing.
First of all, what is this idiot doing carrying around nude pictures of herself on her cellphone? A lot of phones get lost or stolen. Nice way to set yourself up for a blackmail attempt. Secondly, don't you think it might be a good idea to get rid of such photos before going in to get a new phone? Those devices that are used to copy data from one phone to another...how do you know that the data isn't copied somewhere other than your new phone? Short answer...you don't.
It just astounds me how careless some people are with cellphones. If you want to keep nudie pics on your phone, fine, but don't be surprised when it falls into the wrong hands. I was at the airport a few weeks ago and some lady sitting across from just gets up and leaves. She leaves her MacBook and iPhone and luggage just sitting on the chair. A few minutes later she comes back with a magazine. Anyone could have just swept in and stole all of it. Then she would have been moaning about being a victim of a crime. She's a victim alright...a victim of her own stupidity.
This is just a sign of the times, of course. A time when people are no longer held accountable for their own mistakes and misjudgments. Take out a loan that everyone, including you, knows you can't repay? Blame the bank. Drive around with a scalding hot cup of coffee between your legs? Blame McDonalds. Your kid is doing poorly at school? Blame the teacher.
Heaven forbid that people might actually take accountability for their own actions. If you take your cellphone into the store with nude pictures of yourself on it and some kid working there sees them then you are a fucking moron and deserve to be humiliated. End of story.
And what would you have us do? Do you think we should continue down the same path? The social welfare state, although well intended, has clearly not eliminated poverty in America. It hasn't even reduced it in any meaningful way. I'm not suggesting we get rid of it I'm suggesting we have a discussion about how to improve it. A meaningful discussion. One without, you know, snide remarks like the one below.
"I'm sure your great insight would solve global poverty instantly." - Global poverty is a much different issue. I have visited third world countries. Have you? I have seen grinding poverty up close and personal. It's enough to bring tears to your eyes. Trust me, it's nothing like people here living in "assisted housing". Their challenges are much more basic - clean drinking water, proper sanitation, disease, lack of access to education. These are issues that we thankfully don't have to face in America. We are fortunate. We have lots of drinking water. We produce more food than we need. Children have access to public education.
Nobody is going to solve global poverty instantly - even an "expert assessor" like me ;-)
I think that the Gates Foundation is making great strides though. He is looking at charitable giving in a much different way, taking a more active role in where his money goes and how it is spent. He is expecting to see progress...and I believe he is. He realizes the magnitude of the problem and sees success more in making targeted gains on specific problems. It's a start.
I would add that the advantage Android has is in sheer numbers. It's by far the most used mobile OS so you've got a bigger audience to sell to. iOS is not far behind. Win8 is a distant, distant forth (behind even Blackberry I would guess). If I'm trying to make a living selling mobile apps you can bet I would be hitching a ride on either Android or iOS. Microsoft is going to have to show me that they have the vision to stick with a plan all the way through. Their recent history has not looked encouraging in that respect.
I'm not a Microsoft developer but haven't we been down this path before with the above technologies? I recall a heavy emphasis on silverlight only to mothball it not long after. if I'm going to write Apps for someone I want some stability and recent history shows that Microsoft has not provided that to their developers.
We love to build up and tear down. Not long ago the press is gushing over Apple. Talking about how their stock it going to $1000 a share. Now they are calling for people's heads. Sure, the Maps thing was a bit of a fiasco but it's not as if it doesn't work at all or the App crashes. From what I understand it's a few places that are not done well. The rest seems to work fine. Remember, Google's map app wasn't very good when it started either.
The problem was the way it was rolled out. It should have been presented as a Beta, not a ready-for-prime-time App. Cook had no choice, he had to do something to save face. I'm not sure how much, if any, blame he shares in this but clearly heads must roll and roll they did.
Apple has had a lot of hits and are under tremendous pressure to keep it up. Android has caught up on features, some might say they have surpassed the iPhone. What Apple still has going for it is a rabid fan base and a reputation for quality hardware. Another slip up could cost them dearly. Time will tell.
In the 3rd world this is the model for how education will be done in the future. How many Stanford professors would be willing to travel in person to the African continent to conduct lectures? Not many I'm willing to bet. But prerecorded lectures could be easily available on cheap tablet computers. The main problems with university education is logistics (you have to travel to the class) and cost (it's too expensive - even for 1st world students). Prerecorded lectures are not ideal but they are a heck of a lot better than what is available to them now. And they can be delivered 1000 times cheaper than in person lectures.
Because of the unions, and the political implications of campaign contributions, this is going to be difficult tower to topple. Universities are already starting to provide distance learning, partly to keep up with places like University of Phoenix and partly because of the sheer economics of it. Recorded lectures are way, way cheaper to provide. Eventually it will be like the news broadcasts - you have attractive actors reading from scripts. Presentation will become more important than content and content will become a commodity. One day you might see professors working as independent contractors and selling lectures by the download.
However, as someone that has worked in Higher Ed I can tell you that things change there very slowly. If they are not careful the new technology will simply leapfrog over them.
Well, poverty is a very complex problem. Yes, it's partly due to inequality but it's also partly due to lack of drive or willpower. I can't think of a country where more opportunity exists than in America. In many countries poverty is due mainly to lack of opportunity. If you were not born into a wealthy family you have little or no chance of every escaping poverty. Not so in America. There are many, many people that have risen from poverty to become wealthy beyond their wildest dreams. More still that have risen from poverty to enjoy a good middle class standard of living.
Some people, even if you hand them opportunity on a silver platter, will not take it. Maybe they lack the intellectual capacity to see opportunities when they arise. Maybe they make bad choices. Maybe they just don't give a shit. For some people, maybe they are happy with their lot in life and don't worry about not having a lot of material things.
As far as "fighting poverty" goes, how do you fight it if nobody really knows how to cure it? Clearly throwing more money at the problem has not worked. I'm not suggesting that we abandon the poor. Society has an obligation to take care of people that can't take care of themselves. The key word there is "can't". I don't believe that society has any obligation to take care of people that WON'T take care of themselves. If they have problems with drugs or alcohol, fine, let's get them some help. But there will always be a small portion of the population that is perfectly able to work and support themselves but have decided, for whatever reason, that they just don't want to. For those I offer no sympathy.
This is a typically American problem - the notion that you can simply throw money at problems and they will go away. The war on poverty has met the same fate. We have essentially the same proportion of people below the poverty line today as we did in LBJ's time despite spending massive amounts of money on it.
If you are a teacher where would you rather work? In a nice, safe suburban school or a dangerous underfunded urban school? The fact that the suburban school also has more money only exacerbates the problem even further since the money that schools get is largely based on the tax base. Neighborhoods with big expensive homes pay more property tax and the schools there get more money. And tend to attract better teachers. So if you are a parent the goal is to move to one of those neighborhoods so that your kid can attend one of those schools. And the cycle continues.
CIO's and other high level executives didn't get to where they are by taking big risks. They are generally very conservative and play it by the book. When the time comes to make a big decision like infrastructure or database or enterprise software they are not going to make that decision unilaterally, even if they are perfectly capable of making it themselves. They are going to bring in "experts", the ones you refer to as high paid consultants, and have them conduct studies and analysis and come up with a recommendation. The CIO will then almost certainly follow that recommendation. Why? Because if something goes wrong he hasn't put his neck out on the line. He has taken the prudent step of bringing in experts and is following their opinions.
Consultants are not necessarily any smarter than anyone else but they often have the advantage of specializing in a given field. When you hire them they can focus on a single task and not get drawn into office politics or have to split their time amongst several projects at once. Sure, some of them are lousy...just like there are lousy doctors and lousy carpenters and lousy hairdressers. But in business appearing to do the right thing is often as important as doing the right thing.
It's the same reason that many companies go the "packaged software" route, rather than develop it in house. If something goes wrong you pick up the phone and report the problem and the vendor is on the hook to fix it. If you build it in house and your lead programmer quits the next day then what do you do?
But times are changing. For many of the Web 2.0 companies (Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) buying packaged software like Oracle is prohibitively expensive when you are starting out. So they use MySQL or Postgre SQL and they are very, very good products. In the right hands they can be just as good as anything from Oracle or Microsoft. It allows them to focus capital on other things and bring ideas to market without incurring extra debt. It's a smart move and it has been proven to be as scalable as anything else out there.
what if the paradigm changes and instead of the tablet being vertical they are horizontal? It could be a big flat surface built into the desk where the touch interaction is done there and the results displayed on a vertical monitor. Kind of like how it's done on CSI or Hawaii 5-0. Whatever you want to have displayed on the monitor you simply flick it towards the screen with a touch gesture, similar to how applications are closed on WebOS. Maybe the display is actually your big screen TV that is connected to your tablet via WiFi or BluTooth. Now THAT would be cool.
But if it's the current configuration of the horizontal monitor then holding your arm up like that all day is going to get tiring.
It seems to me that many of the people that now use Linux/OSX/Android/iOS are doing it precisely because they DON'T want to use MicroSoft products. All of the aforementioned systems work just fine without any assistance from MS. Ok, so MS has a new OS and a new tablet. That's great if you're looking to stay in that ecosystem. But if you're using one of the other operating systems why in the world would you want to change?
I use a Mac and an Android phone and tablet. I've got a Windows VM on my Mac and haven't had to use it in probably a year. But I keep in around just in case. The phone and tablet work great. I've got tons of apps to choose from and I can do anything I want with it. Windows 8 and their shiny new tablet do no excite me in the least. I'm happy with what I've got.