I also find that, like other posters have said, people who have never used the command line do not know what they can do with it. And so a lot of simple taks (recursively delete all files called *.log that are over 7 days old) become a real chore. Winkey-F All or part of the filename: "*.log" Look in: Whatever. Sort by: Date Modified.
I've been using the commandline for quite a long time, and I have never seen a way to recursivly delete files other than "rm -rf *" or "deltree Dir". Both of these commands, as you know, are a bit rash that remove every single file with no filter.
In fact, I never remembered any easy way to recursivly delete a specific set of files in any command line - never really needed it. The only way I know that it is possible is to use the tree command to list every file, grep the output, and set the output as the commandline parameters for the delete command.
Are there franchise opportunities with Electronics Boutique? All EB stores are company owned and operated and not available as franchise opportunities
The "Franchise" excuse doesn't hold any water. This IS A corporate issue, so there's no waffling out of it.
I didn't know that, but similar principles hold regardless of whether its a corporate chain or franchise.
For franchises, there are a set of guidelines on how you should operate your business. If you break them, then you will no longer be an authorized franchizee, and must either sell your business, return your business to the standard code, or remove references to the franchise (e.g. split off).
In the coperate chain, each store must also abide by the same set of rules. If the manager refuses to do the correct action, the proper procedure is to contact the store manager's boss (preferably via return-receipt mail - that gets attention), along with the usual flak generators (media/police/etc).
While franchising and coporate chains are different, they both follow similar organizational structures where individual stores need to report to some form of supervisor. In this case, the best chance is to climb the corporate ladder when sending messages to the company, such as targetting the equivalent of a person managing multiple stores in an area. As soon as he or she knows one of his stores has become a fence for stolen goods, he probably wants to take action before it becomes too much of a problem.
If contacting that supervisor doesn't work, go one step further (and perhaps using return-receipt mail, in order to increase attention.) If there is actually no response whatsoever from a large quantity of letters to upper management, then there is a major problem with the company. Most likely, you will receive a form letter stating that the incident will be investiaged, which is better than nothing.
1. A significant portion of the schools have high requirements to be classified as G&T. While certain schools are better than others, there were many complaints from parents who did not have students admitted because they missed the requirement by one point on an IQ test. (Luckily, my school was fairly reasonable in the requirements - but looking back, nothing much was gained from it.)
2. Schools that are for G&T students are generally more expensive than the public counterparts. There are exceptions, but is the case more often than not.
3. The parent(s) need to take an active role in raising a G&T child, regardless of which school the student is being sent to (Guidance councelers may be good enough, but aren't a perfect substitute.) If there is no active positive support from a figure of authority, then the child won't be as good as he could be.
4. If you push too hard, the child will be burned out. If you try forcing the child to produce art when he doesn't have the capability of doing so (e.g Asbergers Syndrome), he will eventually give up and consider himself to be incapable of producing anything other than Modern Art.
Can't really give resourses, as this information is from a paper newsletter being remembered after reading it 5+ years ago. If I had more solid links, I'd go out of my way to find them once more.
Do what I just did, write an e-mail to EB Games and inform them that you find their business practices unsavory
Does the practices of a single franchise represent the entire chain? If so, then you can send the mail with a clear conscience. Otherwise, you are just punishing random companies that have no relation to the incident.
You should be able to easily find EB Games stores that have a better respect of the law than this small incident, whom are willing to put an item on reserve if the legal ownership of the product is in dispute. (Other methods are also available, such as giving store credit instead of cash - when the products are determined to be stolen, the credit gets revoked. )
The rocket launcher caused huge problems with its 5 loading in original UT.
6-loading, actually. It origianlly appeared in "Unreal" as the stick of six fires, and wasn't determined to be unbalancing at the time (ha, as if). There are other similarities between Unreal and UT weaponry, which can be left to an exercise for the reader.
The six-rocket pack may have been considered acceptable, mainly because the defensive items in Unreal are stackable (shiled, armor, and super-health for a 500 hitpoint supersoldier). Now that armor is capped at 150, six rockets has become a bit too powerful.
The ripper was stupid, so its gone. It was easier to kill someone by accident than deliberately.
I'd agree, even though it is fairly useful against AI players. Just aim just above the horizontal plane and it does headshots 4 times out of 5. It's an intentional kill but considered "spamming" by veteren players (but that's the point of the ripper.)
This trick doesn't work on bunny hoppers, or players who know to stay away from flying bits of metal. And given that the other weapons are much better than the Ripper (when you exclude head-shots), it's no suprise that it was taken out.
That's not quite true. You can place a mini-scope onto a pistol to turn it into a miniture sniper rifle. Half-life's Firearms Mod does this with the Colt Anaconda (if you have the Marksmanship skill). A person I know who plays the game uses the Colt Anaconda along with one other weapon (G36E, but I'm not sure).
This Anaconda isn't as powerful as the dedicated sniper rifles, but can be used for sniping the opposing team.
They took out assault, fucked with the weapons, and even yanked the sniper rifle.
A sniper rifle by any other name is still a sniper rifle - even if it shoots lightning.
The lightning gun is a simple case of overcompensation - it was extremely overpowered in the first Unreal Tournament. As proof, play CTF-FacingWorlds against Godlike bots - it is no problem to enter a killing spree with 25+ kills.
In UT2003, it's much harder to do so on the same map (although it can be debated that the central Pyrmaid cuts down on available targets.) Since the firing rate is cut down, the supporting enemies of the recently killed have a chance to return fire against the sniper using almost any weapon they choose - including superweapons.
There are cases in the game world where the server has a map while you do not. Installing UT2004 in a Cyber cafe is an example where you only have the base game + patches installed.
For downloads that take more than one minute, the user gives up waiting for the download to finish as all that's shown is the progress bar trickling forward. There are ways to alleviate this problem (e.g. having the next map download during gameplay, or compressing the map before download), but I have never seen any of these methods really implemented.
The big secret: "tip the bottle and see if you can see 'again' under the cap." Sheer genius.
It's a nice secret, but even this was defeated. Some pop-bottle promotions have been using an opaque plastic, meaning that you couldn't tell even when you tilt the bottle to look at the inside of the cap.
It's the simplest of tricks to prevent such knowledge, but suprisingly effecive. The only thing that I think could allow you to view the secret within the cap is to shine a bright light through it, and I'm not sure you'd want to do that with your remaining eye.
I get angry when I hop into a multiplayer map that I haven't played before and find out that I am given no fucking clue what to do.
MOD PARENT UP!
This is especially too true on most large maps. Even ones that have fairly straight forward objectives, there is no method to determine how to reach one point or another making it impossible for you to do anything other than defend. I've barely seen any changes made to correct this issue (UT2003 fixes this somewhat by giving a pointer to the objective.)
UT started this bad trend in their Assault mode (Assault was a race, and you had to waste race time to read objectives) and few people fix it.
That is true - you did have to read the objectives in order to know what is going on. On the other hand, there are a few things that are generally helpful:
1. AI players tend to bunch around the objective to defend - you'll know what the target is (but not always what to do with it.) 2. AI players constantly swarm the objective (unless ordered otherwise by default or by player), usually at the cost of being prepared to defend themselves. They get killed most of the time, but if you can take out the defenders, the AIs should do the job for you. 3. The maps are generally small enough that they are straight forward - no need worrying about hunting down that enterence. 4. You perform each assault map in the campaign, reading the objectived without eating into your timer. (Exception: custom maps, which may or may not be designed properly.)
For a similar game, but with only one human player per army, play the Battlezone games.
Battlezone II has fixed this for sure - up to four players are allowed on one team, although there are still a few bugs in the interface (e.g. regular unit appearing in the same command slot as a human player.)
I think WCIII player matching to some degree reached many goals to match player abilities somewhat evenly... But I haven't seen thier thinking passed onto the FPS gaming arena.
Actually, it has - Check out Descent 2, Descent: Freespace.
These two games assign a ranking to the player which gradually increases as you complete multiplayer games. It is generally based around the number of kills you make, with a few other factors.
The rankings are only really enforced with PXO - with regular internet servers, it's possible to spoof your ranking to make it look higher or lower than it really is.
If you cheat, your ranking goes up but you may find that you can get detected much more easily and get banned as a result. And since you're high rank, you can't join the newbie servers.
you can be a reasonably better but if you have any other weapon, you will lose against the rocket
A skilled player using the grenade launcher is more powerful than a skilled player using the Rocket Launhcer. Those who have checked the QuakeC source code can see that the cooldown time for the GL is 0.2 seconds shorter than the Rocket. In addition, the GL always does 120 direct hit and radius damage as opposed to the 100+1d20 performed by the RL.
It's also why "Grenade spamming" is considered annoying in that game, even though it is only a short range weapon.
The expansion pack really made the game rock though, the only bad thing I can say about it is that it made the new race (the metal/robot guys) too powerful
That may be true, but they are relativly weak against a Aramon player. While their forces may be more powerful than the other races, they are slightly out-ranged by the Veruna Mortar, and by the Aramon Trebuchet - the two most devistating conventional weapons in the entire game.
Their defences are relativly weak as well - the Gatling crossbow appears to do very light damage, the bomb sprinkler has a warmup time, and the primatic tower has a shortage of hitpoints. (Although, the tower is extremely powerful in large groups as one of them can nail most units in a few hits.)
I do wish they had continued the story the same way it was in the original TA though, in TA:K, they had you playing different sides all the time in one storyline, whereas in TA, you could play both sides to victory, each with its own unique storyline.
That method of campaign creation, as you know, causes plot fragmentation. In turn, this results in various plot lines (or campaigns) being discarded as un-official and treated as if they never happened in the first place.
Take a look at The Core Contingency expansion pack - this makes the assumption that Arm won the first four millenium war. What happens to the Core Campaign from the original TA? It gets discarded, with no official revisitation with something like "The Arm Contingency". It makes me wonder why the discarded campaigns were made in the first place.
Appearently, the game comes on SIX cds! Holy hi-res textures, batman! However, they are going to release a DVD edition, I urge you all to buy it! (You are going to buy the game if you like it...right?)
I am so fed up with having games that come on DVDs for consoles being converted to lots of easy scratchable CDs for the PC release. At least if you are a RPG fan it is beginning to feel like we are back to the good old floppy times. "Please insert next media..."
This is the reason that compression should be used for the installers of such games. If large quantities of data need to be copied from the various disks, at least use the smallest scale of compression to shave off one CD (or even giving 40-50MB of slack to reduce the fatal scratch area or the equivalent in error correction ).
There are other space-saving tactics as well, such as transferring the extra models/textures onto the last CD (just like UT), and making their installation optional. Naturally, these options should default to on to prevent reviewers from whining too much.
The think concepts of registers and memory locations and stack pointers and branching is easier to understand in assembly. You can teach a simple subset of instructions.
That's assuming that the person can actually understand what is going on for each instruction. This is extremely important if the person is very young, where knowledge of computers is limited to what appears on the screen.
Your four-year-old offspring will not be able to understand assembly or machine language, because there is no sufficient assoication between individual instructions and their actions. On the other hand, they will see and understand the BASIC instructions such as "LET SUM=5+10: PRINT SUM", becuase the language provides an obvious association between commands and their results. Assembly language is harder to understand, since there is no obvious association with the command and result.
I am saying this from personal experience. I turned away from assembly when I saw that I had to type 6-8 lines of code to draw just one character on the screen (including it's color), when Basic only needed 2-3 lines (one POKE for the character, one POKE for the color, and one optional END or RETURN.) It took until Borland C++ 3.0 before I could understand assembly was a direct translation into machine language, as opposed to interpreted code like BASIC.
Is there a clever way to solve this problem, or is the reliability of it tied to a low amount of packet loss on a network?
The only way to get around this problem is to transmit each packet twice or more, and configure the host so that it drops the second packet (i.e. not count it towards the combination). And while you're doing so, use the UDP protocol instead of the TCP protocol - it gets rid of the error checking that isn't needed (or even looked at) for this sort of task.
Based on what I see from documentation of this silly knock thingy, it does not contain *any* information on how it reacts to the unreliable nature of the internet. Because of this, the proper procedure is to assume the worst case scenario - it chokes on any form of failure, such as packet loss, repeated packets (which usually get dropped by the receiver), transposed packets (they can happen - TCP was actually designed for this), and mangled packets (line noise).
Re:How did this virus spread so easily?
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 1
Give a file "virus.exe" the same icon graphic as a word file, and most users wouldn't know the difference.
That's not exactly true. If they see something labelled "virus", they would enter a panicky state and proceed to disinfect the computer and monitor with Lysol, and rinse using soapy hot water.
But still, executable attachment problem will need to be fixed in one way or another. The most obvious is to prevent msoffice files from containg VBScript, and to prevent e-mail clients from directly opening those files (e.g. must be saved to desktop first.)
You may want to look into the Serious Engine developed by Croteam. It is capable of doing on-the fly editing without needing to rebuild geometry. As with Build, editing isn't done ingame, but it is still considered realtime. The game is playable even after the most minor of changes (unlike almost every other 3D engine on the market.)
The only cavats: - The Serious Engine is commercial - you need to purchase a license (although you can get the map editor with the Serious Sam, which isn't too expensive.) - If you want to sell products with the Serious Engine, you will need to pay a fee for commercial distribution. - There are a few physics and display bugs with the engine, but these shouldn't be too much of a problem. - You still need to recalculate lighting and shadows when you make major architectural changes (optional, you could play with missing or non-standard shadows if you desire.)
There aren't many engines that support realtime modifications to the map, but this is one of the most modern ones.
Anyone who has ever gotten a job other than flipping burgers knows that the "requirements" are a wish list of things the company would like. DO NOT follow this advise while looking for a job. Apply to any that look like you could do it even if you have 6 months too little experience or 8 out of 10 required skills!
While the exact amount of experience is a wish list, any company that is requesting 5-10 years of Windows XP support is looking for people more experienced than yourself (unless you personally have actually developed Windows XP). Appling for such jobs is pointless and a waste of your time and paper.
Such major requirements must be met before you can even get past the interview phase. If companies can't clearly state their primary requirements, then how can you be sure you are appling to a computer-based job instead of flipping burgers?
I hope you explicity say this, otherwise this is your problem.
There is a general minimum amount of e-mail etiquette on the web - a de facto standard. It is not the duty of hiring companies to restate standard internet protocol by stating that all your primary messages must be written in plain text, with word wrap at 75 columns.
Back to the Future Part II had that 3D shark that "ate" the protagonist, then disappeared. It turned out to be an advertisement for Jaws 19. ("Shark still looks fake," says Marty)
I certainly hope that advertising doesn't get so high-tech and annoying that you can't walk through the business district of town without being eaten by a holographic sea creature.
IIRC, the protagonist was standing still for a significant period of time (one step away from loitering.) It's most likely designed to give viewers of that ad an extremely "personal" sample of what the movie will be like.
Throw in the time to save/close out, patch, reboot (and my reboot can take 6-10 minutes with the systray deathmarch I have going on:), and to get back to where you were
Even so, the times listed are not exactly accurrate for installing Windows XP security updates, unless you are a dedicated system administrator installing patches over a wide area of work.
The amount of time required that should be recorded should only include the amount of time spent reading the patch descriptions, the time spent reading the EULA, time spent clicking on a few widgets for the patch, and the reboot (if necessairy.)
The amount of time spent waiting for the patch to finish downloading is considered "slack" time, which can easily be filled by performing another task (e.g. Reading Slashdot.org, or playing Minesweeper.) Since I'm on a 56K, I kind of have to do this anyway.
The pop-up is opened by software that is running on the computer.
The problem with fixing this is that it breaks many applications that wish to open a web browser window when a user clicks on a hyperlink. These include legitimate applications such as Forte Agent, resulting in the annoying cut-and-paste just to launch a website.
Of course, to get the Windows programming documentation, you have to pay the MSDN subscription.
IIRC, the MSDN documentation library was included in MSVC++ 6.0 - unless Microsoft has unbundled the documentation from their development environment, you can probably expect a copy in MS Studio.Net. (Not sure, so don't count on it.)
Slashdot Mirror
For franchises, there are a set of guidelines on how you should operate your business. If you break them, then you will no longer be an authorized franchizee, and must either sell your business, return your business to the standard code, or remove references to the franchise (e.g. split off).
In the coperate chain, each store must also abide by the same set of rules. If the manager refuses to do the correct action, the proper procedure is to contact the store manager's boss (preferably via return-receipt mail - that gets attention), along with the usual flak generators (media/police/etc).
While franchising and coporate chains are
different, they both follow similar organizational structures where individual stores need to report to some form of supervisor. In this case, the best chance is to climb the corporate ladder when sending messages to the company, such as targetting the equivalent of a person managing multiple stores in an area. As soon as he or she knows one of his stores has become a fence for stolen goods, he probably wants to take action before it becomes too much of a problem.
If contacting that supervisor doesn't work, go one step further (and perhaps using return-receipt mail, in order to increase attention.) If there is actually no response whatsoever from a large quantity of letters to upper management, then there is a major problem with the company. Most likely, you will receive a form letter stating that the incident will be investiaged, which is better than nothing.
That's a nice suggestion, but:
1. A significant portion of the schools have high requirements to be classified as G&T. While certain schools are better than others, there were many complaints from parents who did not have students admitted because they missed the requirement by one point on an IQ test. (Luckily, my school was fairly reasonable in the requirements - but looking back, nothing much was gained from it.)
2. Schools that are for G&T students are generally more expensive than the public counterparts. There are exceptions, but is the case more often than not.
3. The parent(s) need to take an active role in raising a G&T child, regardless of which school the student is being sent to (Guidance councelers may be good enough, but aren't a perfect substitute.) If there is no active positive support from a figure of authority, then the child won't be as good as he could be.
4. If you push too hard, the child will be burned out. If you try forcing the child to produce art when he doesn't have the capability of doing so (e.g Asbergers Syndrome), he will eventually give up and consider himself to be incapable of producing anything other than Modern Art.
Can't really give resourses, as this information is from a paper newsletter being remembered after reading it 5+ years ago. If I had more solid links, I'd go out of my way to find them once more.
You should be able to easily find EB Games stores that have a better respect of the law than this small incident, whom are willing to put an item on reserve if the legal ownership of the product is in dispute. (Other methods are also available, such as giving store credit instead of cash - when the products are determined to be stolen, the credit gets revoked. )
The six-rocket pack may have been considered acceptable, mainly because the defensive items in Unreal are stackable (shiled, armor, and super-health for a 500 hitpoint supersoldier). Now that armor is capped at 150, six rockets has become a bit too powerful.
I'd agree, even though it is fairly useful against AI players. Just aim just above the horizontal plane and it does headshots 4 times out of 5. It's an intentional kill but considered "spamming" by veteren players (but that's the point of the ripper.)
This trick doesn't work on bunny hoppers, or players who know to stay away from flying bits of metal. And given that the other weapons are much better than the Ripper (when you exclude head-shots), it's no suprise that it was taken out.
That's not quite true. You can place a mini-scope onto a pistol to turn it into a miniture sniper rifle. Half-life's Firearms Mod does this with the Colt Anaconda (if you have the Marksmanship skill). A person I know who plays the game uses the Colt Anaconda along with one other weapon (G36E, but I'm not sure).
This Anaconda isn't as powerful as the dedicated sniper rifles, but can be used for sniping the opposing team.
A sniper rifle by any other name is still a sniper rifle - even if it shoots lightning.
The lightning gun is a simple case of overcompensation - it was extremely overpowered in the first Unreal Tournament. As proof, play CTF-FacingWorlds against Godlike bots - it is no problem to enter a killing spree with 25+ kills.
In UT2003, it's much harder to do so on the same map (although it can be debated that the central Pyrmaid cuts down on available targets.) Since the firing rate is cut down, the supporting enemies of the recently killed have a chance to return fire against the sniper using almost any weapon they choose - including superweapons.
In UT2004, it is.
There are cases in the game world where the server has a map while you do not. Installing UT2004 in a Cyber cafe is an example where you only have the base game + patches installed.
For downloads that take more than one minute, the user gives up waiting for the download to finish as all that's shown is the progress bar trickling forward. There are ways to alleviate this problem (e.g. having the next map download during gameplay, or compressing the map before download), but I have never seen any of these methods really implemented.
It's the simplest of tricks to prevent such knowledge, but suprisingly effecive. The only thing that I think could allow you to view the secret within the cap is to shine a bright light through it, and I'm not sure you'd want to do that with your remaining eye.
This is especially too true on most large maps. Even ones that have fairly straight forward objectives, there is no method to determine how to reach one point or another making it impossible for you to do anything other than defend. I've barely seen any changes made to correct this issue (UT2003 fixes this somewhat by giving a pointer to the objective.)
That is true - you did have to read the objectives in order to know what is going on. On the other hand, there are a few things that are generally helpful:
1. AI players tend to bunch around the objective to defend - you'll know what the target is (but not always what to do with it.)
2. AI players constantly swarm the objective (unless ordered otherwise by default or by player), usually at the cost of being prepared to defend themselves. They get killed most of the time, but if you can take out the defenders, the AIs should do the job for you.
3. The maps are generally small enough that they are straight forward - no need worrying about hunting down that enterence.
4. You perform each assault map in the campaign, reading the objectived without eating into your timer. (Exception: custom maps, which may or may not be designed properly.)
Battlezone II has fixed this for sure - up to four players are allowed on one team, although there are still a few bugs in the interface (e.g. regular unit appearing in the same command slot as a human player.)
Actually, it has - Check out Descent 2, Descent: Freespace.
These two games assign a ranking to the player which gradually increases as you complete multiplayer games. It is generally based around the number of kills you make, with a few other factors.
The rankings are only really enforced with PXO - with regular internet servers, it's possible to spoof your ranking to make it look higher or lower than it really is.
If you cheat, your ranking goes up but you may find that you can get detected much more easily and get banned as a result. And since you're high rank, you can't join the newbie servers.
It's also why "Grenade spamming" is considered annoying in that game, even though it is only a short range weapon.
That may be true, but they are relativly weak against a Aramon player. While their forces may be more powerful than the other races, they are slightly out-ranged by the Veruna Mortar, and by the Aramon Trebuchet - the two most devistating conventional weapons in the entire game.
Their defences are relativly weak as well - the Gatling crossbow appears to do very light damage, the bomb sprinkler has a warmup time, and the primatic tower has a shortage of hitpoints. (Although, the tower is extremely powerful in large groups as one of them can nail most units in a few hits.)
That method of campaign creation, as you know, causes plot fragmentation. In turn, this results in various plot lines (or campaigns) being discarded as un-official and treated as if they never happened in the first place.
Take a look at The Core Contingency expansion pack - this makes the assumption that Arm won the first four millenium war. What happens to the Core Campaign from the original TA? It gets discarded, with no official revisitation with something like "The Arm Contingency". It makes me wonder why the discarded campaigns were made in the first place.
There are other space-saving tactics as well, such as transferring the extra models/textures onto the last CD (just like UT), and making their installation optional. Naturally, these options should default to on to prevent reviewers from whining too much.
Your four-year-old offspring will not be able to understand assembly or machine language, because there is no sufficient assoication between individual instructions and their actions. On the other hand, they will see and understand the BASIC instructions such as "LET SUM=5+10: PRINT SUM", becuase the language provides an obvious association between commands and their results. Assembly language is harder to understand, since there is no obvious association with the command and result.
I am saying this from personal experience. I turned away from assembly when I saw that I had to type 6-8 lines of code to draw just one character on the screen (including it's color), when Basic only needed 2-3 lines (one POKE for the character, one POKE for the color, and one optional END or RETURN.) It took until Borland C++ 3.0 before I could understand assembly was a direct translation into machine language, as opposed to interpreted code like BASIC.
Based on what I see from documentation of this silly knock thingy, it does not contain *any* information on how it reacts to the unreliable nature of the internet. Because of this, the proper procedure is to assume the worst case scenario - it chokes on any form of failure, such as packet loss, repeated packets (which usually get dropped by the receiver), transposed packets (they can happen - TCP was actually designed for this), and mangled packets (line noise).
But still, executable attachment problem will need to be fixed in one way or another. The most obvious is to prevent msoffice files from containg VBScript, and to prevent e-mail clients from directly opening those files (e.g. must be saved to desktop first.)
You may want to look into the Serious Engine developed by Croteam. It is capable of doing on-the fly editing without needing to rebuild geometry. As with Build, editing isn't done ingame, but it is still considered realtime. The game is playable even after the most minor of changes (unlike almost every other 3D engine on the market.)
The only cavats:
- The Serious Engine is commercial - you need to purchase a license (although you can get the map editor with the Serious Sam, which isn't too expensive.)
- If you want to sell products with the Serious Engine, you will need to pay a fee for commercial distribution.
- There are a few physics and display bugs with the engine, but these shouldn't be too much of a problem.
- You still need to recalculate lighting and shadows when you make major architectural changes (optional, you could play with missing or non-standard shadows if you desire.)
There aren't many engines that support realtime modifications to the map, but this is one of the most modern ones.
While the exact amount of experience is a wish list, any company that is requesting 5-10 years of Windows XP support is looking for people more experienced than yourself (unless you personally have actually developed Windows XP). Appling for such jobs is pointless and a waste of your time and paper.
Such major requirements must be met before you can even get past the interview phase. If companies can't clearly state their primary requirements, then how can you be sure you are appling to a computer-based job instead of flipping burgers?
There is a general minimum amount of e-mail etiquette on the web - a de facto standard. It is not the duty of hiring companies to restate standard internet protocol by stating that all your primary messages must be written in plain text, with word wrap at 75 columns.
IIRC, the protagonist was standing still for a significant period of time (one step away from loitering.) It's most likely designed to give viewers of that ad an extremely "personal" sample of what the movie will be like.
Even so, the times listed are not exactly accurrate for installing Windows XP security updates, unless you are a dedicated system administrator installing patches over a wide area of work.
The amount of time required that should be recorded should only include the amount of time spent reading the patch descriptions, the time spent reading the EULA, time spent clicking on a few widgets for the patch, and the reboot (if necessairy.)
The amount of time spent waiting for the patch to finish downloading is considered "slack" time, which can easily be filled by performing another task (e.g. Reading Slashdot.org, or playing Minesweeper.) Since I'm on a 56K, I kind of have to do this anyway.
The problem with fixing this is that it breaks many applications that wish to open a web browser window when a user clicks on a hyperlink. These include legitimate applications such as Forte Agent, resulting in the annoying cut-and-paste just to launch a website.
These guys are a bit bad at math.
2002 Total Price Christmas Index: $14,558.05
2002 "Core" index, excluding swans: $12,458.06
2002 Cost of swans: $2100.00
$14,558.05 - 12.458.06 = $2099.99
I'm more interested in where the missing penny is rather than how they arrived at the individual prices for the items.
IIRC, the MSDN documentation library was included in MSVC++ 6.0 - unless Microsoft has unbundled the documentation from their development environment, you can probably expect a copy in MS Studio