You can't distinguish between/. banter and how you would deal with people not happy in a real life situation, but here you are, pontificating about the matter.
We all rile about other people in private, and many of us think our ideas are the best, that does not mean we approach people with lack of respect, in a forum like this many people will let some steam off without that being necessarily be how they would talk in a more formal situation.
it only took the white settlers and their descendants 240 years or thereabouts to mend some of the damage done (slavery, genocide of original American inhabitants).
That suspicious bastard had no reason whatsoever to doubt the good intentions of the white folk in the US of A !
The decision to go to a war based on lies is the responsibility of a single man.
The decision to allow torture and illegal detention of people without trial was the decision of a single man.
I could carry on, it should be clear that many decisions that affected (fatally in many cases) the lives of thousands (perhaps millions) of people where the legal and moral responsibility of one single person.
Heterosexual people have the right to marry whoever they chose.
Homosexual people don't.
Homosexual people find themselves in exactly the same position "interracial" marriages found themselves decades ago: with state governments curtailing their freedoms to pursue happiness as they see fit.
The time will come when people will not understand how such barbaric impositions were in place.
Please show me any statistics or studies of any kind where this is even hinted at.
Is anything you are you hinting at your own prejudices. I see both assholes and nice honourable people being promoted, being successful and achieving what they want.
For every asshole CEO for example one can mention a successful one that wasn't such and that triumphed by being humble and fair with people around him.
All this bullshit about being aggressive to triumph in life has no basis in any certifiable and verifiable reality whatsoever.
I am a very nice guy, honest, but nobody screws with me, Period. Have met plenty of people like this (and can think of many, Nelson mandela for example).
I don't understand why in some people's brains these character traits seem to be mutually exclusive.
Nowadays you have more chances to find a job online than in the off chance that one of your acquaintances finding something for you.
I still would try to keep in touch with people, it does not harm, but the possibilities offered by networking in "meatsapce" nowadays are dwarfed by what you can find with a good CV and a bit of web surfing.
There is no amount of schmoozing, and brown-nosing (for bunnies sakes, can't you use other expression?) that will get you anywhere if first you don't know your stuff.
The ticket to the park is your knowledge, playing the political game is all great and good, but at the end you will be judged mostly by how well you do your work, anything else is icing on the cake.
"Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints."
Do IT professionals:
- Develop economic and safe solutions to practical problems? Yep.
- Apply mathematics and scientific knowledge? Yep.
One that presents buttons, a little pull down menu, you know those things that every desktop computer do nowadays, and then issues the ftp command in the background.
Linux can do it, I am sure it is not beyond the capabilities of DELL, HP, Asus, Sony or TOshiba to do such a thing.
I don't know if some of you are just having a bad day or if people here are really this unimaginative.
What they need to remove is access to the layer that deals with the http protocol and presents it to end users in desktop machines.
MS decided to embed that deeply into other user space applications in order to claim it was an integral part of the Windows Operating System.
First of all http rendering has never been part of the tasks an operating system has to do ( I have seen machines that licensed Windows kernels for other purposes and there was no browser available), so the hazy engineering has all happened in userland, where MS has been fighting for the eyeballs of desktop users.
A browser is not part of the OS. It may be part of the suite of applications that you expect to see in a modern desktop environment, but allow me to assure you that browsing functionality is not essential for a computer to do useful work.
As a matter of fact one of the first things to go in server installations should be a browser (I have seen specialized appliances based on Windows - really - where there was no access to the browser).
... you aren't in any position to dictate their direction.
Such a move would be irresponsible and suicidal when it comes to share price and reputation (not to mention lost sales and the possibility of litigation).
Computing was not invented yesterday: somebody writes a script that allows users to select the browser of their choice, which is promptly downloaded using any of a myriad of methods available to you (ftp, http, ssh, you name it).
Or the OEM simply decides to install a given browser (they already install all kind of crap in Windows machines, why should the browser be any different?)
As for using different software increasing support costs, really, what are you smoking? The MS support monkey will just point people in the direction of the company or organization responsible for the support of the relevant piece of software, as they do with every single piece of software produced by a third party.
If it is supported by the OEM then they have to weigh costs and come to the decision that is best for them, but as things stand they have abrogated that decision since MS has them all by the proverbial hairy ones. MS has being taking decisions that should be OEM's for ages, thanks to the abuse of their monopoly, so I suspect that OEMs will not necessarily be terribley unhappy with such a development.
Slashdot Mirror
You can't distinguish between /. banter and how you would deal with people not happy in a real life situation, but here you are, pontificating about the matter.
We all rile about other people in private, and many of us think our ideas are the best, that does not mean we approach people with lack of respect, in a forum like this many people will let some steam off without that being necessarily be how they would talk in a more formal situation.
it only took the white settlers and their descendants 240 years or thereabouts to mend some of the damage done (slavery, genocide of original American inhabitants).
That suspicious bastard had no reason whatsoever to doubt the good intentions of the white folk in the US of A !
Oh yeah, lets ignore one was preaching hate and war while the other is promising noble goals.
But yeah, lets keep making idiotic comparisons for the sake of argument.
It is all there in bloody Wikipedia.
Never.
But nice quantum leap of logic there...
He is saying you have to do something about your country, he can't do it all alone.
Advisers advice.
Rulers take decisions and should be held accountable for them.
The decision to go to a war based on lies is the responsibility of a single man.
The decision to allow torture and illegal detention of people without trial was the decision of a single man.
I could carry on, it should be clear that many decisions that affected (fatally in many cases) the lives of thousands (perhaps millions) of people where the legal and moral responsibility of one single person.
I hope that individual never finds any peace.
Heterosexual people have the right to marry whoever they chose.
Homosexual people don't.
Homosexual people find themselves in exactly the same position "interracial" marriages found themselves decades ago: with state governments curtailing their freedoms to pursue happiness as they see fit.
The time will come when people will not understand how such barbaric impositions were in place.
If you think that is progress, well, all the power to you.
Please show me any statistics or studies of any kind where this is even hinted at.
Is anything you are you hinting at your own prejudices. I see both assholes and nice honourable people being promoted, being successful and achieving what they want.
For every asshole CEO for example one can mention a successful one that wasn't such and that triumphed by being humble and fair with people around him.
All this bullshit about being aggressive to triumph in life has no basis in any certifiable and verifiable reality whatsoever.
I am a very nice guy, honest, but nobody screws with me, Period. Have met plenty of people like this (and can think of many, Nelson mandela for example).
I don't understand why in some people's brains these character traits seem to be mutually exclusive.
Nowadays you have more chances to find a job online than in the off chance that one of your acquaintances finding something for you.
I still would try to keep in touch with people, it does not harm, but the possibilities offered by networking in "meatsapce" nowadays are dwarfed by what you can find with a good CV and a bit of web surfing.
There is no amount of schmoozing, and brown-nosing (for bunnies sakes, can't you use other expression?) that will get you anywhere if first you don't know your stuff.
The ticket to the park is your knowledge, playing the political game is all great and good, but at the end you will be judged mostly by how well you do your work, anything else is icing on the cake.
You don't need to be a sociopath to triumph in life.
The Prince and the Art of War are interesting reading in a world were power is an end to itself and human consequences don't matter.
In other words, the worlds described there are the realm of tyrants and despots with unbound power and no accountability.
From Wikipedia (apt definition in my opinion):
"Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints."
Do IT professionals:
- Develop economic and safe solutions to practical problems? Yep.
- Apply mathematics and scientific knowledge? Yep.
- Consider technical constraints? Yep.
Ditto for network Engineers.
So what is your frigging point?
You can offer the most precisely doing what you are good at.
One that presents buttons, a little pull down menu, you know those things that every desktop computer do nowadays, and then issues the ftp command in the background.
Linux can do it, I am sure it is not beyond the capabilities of DELL, HP, Asus, Sony or TOshiba to do such a thing.
I don't know if some of you are just having a bad day or if people here are really this unimaginative.
Try it, I am sure you are creative, the sky is the limit.
What they need to remove is access to the layer that deals with the http protocol and presents it to end users in desktop machines.
MS decided to embed that deeply into other user space applications in order to claim it was an integral part of the Windows Operating System.
First of all http rendering has never been part of the tasks an operating system has to do ( I have seen machines that licensed Windows kernels for other purposes and there was no browser available), so the hazy engineering has all happened in userland, where MS has been fighting for the eyeballs of desktop users.
All the rest are user space applications.
A browser is not part of the OS. It may be part of the suite of applications that you expect to see in a modern desktop environment, but allow me to assure you that browsing functionality is not essential for a computer to do useful work.
As a matter of fact one of the first things to go in server installations should be a browser (I have seen specialized appliances based on Windows - really - where there was no access to the browser).
No way you want to slice it: a computer can operate without a browser.
It is horrifying to see such monumental ignorance in a website where people are supposed to have a bit of a clue.
For bunnies sakes, why to comment if you don't even understand the issue at hand...
... you aren't in any position to dictate their direction.
Such a move would be irresponsible and suicidal when it comes to share price and reputation (not to mention lost sales and the possibility of litigation).
Computing was not invented yesterday: somebody writes a script that allows users to select the browser of their choice, which is promptly downloaded using any of a myriad of methods available to you (ftp, http, ssh, you name it).
Or the OEM simply decides to install a given browser (they already install all kind of crap in Windows machines, why should the browser be any different?)
As for using different software increasing support costs, really, what are you smoking? The MS support monkey will just point people in the direction of the company or organization responsible for the support of the relevant piece of software, as they do with every single piece of software produced by a third party.
If it is supported by the OEM then they have to weigh costs and come to the decision that is best for them, but as things stand they have abrogated that decision since MS has them all by the proverbial hairy ones. MS has being taking decisions that should be OEM's for ages, thanks to the abuse of their monopoly, so I suspect that OEMs will not necessarily be terribley unhappy with such a development.