And did you ever see a pick-up truck in europe as means of personal transport?
I drove from Denmark (Copenhagen) to Switzerland (Bern) recently. I was in Frankfurt am Main before I ran into the first American style 'big ass' SUV pickup. Europeans often drive smaller hatchbacks. The VW Fox/Polo/Golf, Opel Corsa and Peugeot 107/207 seem to be particularly popular in Germany and so are bigger saloon cars from makers like the BMW, Audi, Mazda, VW, Opel, Skoda, Citroen... the list goes on. You also get some CUVs. Subaru and Suzuki are popular in rural areas because they build even small hatchbacks and saloons with a 4x4 drive. Gigantic American style SUVs are pretty much a rarity. You probably wouldn't have an easy time navigating something like a Dodge Ram through many European cities, towns and villages (especially the model with the double rear wheels that requires two parking spaces). In many of these places the streets date back to medieval times and are very narrow. Another point is of course the fact that gas prices are high and people can generally think of better things to spend their money on than quenching an SUV's thirst for fuel. I drive a small 3 door diesel hatchback. On may way through Denmark the clerk at a Statiol station got the pumps mixed up and tried to bill me for the Diesel tanked by a small SUV. I was really shocked to see the size of the bill which was about 4 times what I had just tanked for (about 180 DKR and the tank on my car was 2/3 empty). I shudder to think what it wold cost to fill up the tank on a Dodge Ram.
... Shooting one 81 doesn't impress me, shooting 3 fired in a ripple that's getting interesting; shoot down 3 fired at the same time I'm impressed, but remember real world is going to be somebody see all the loud IR energy pointing at the laser source and they are likely to answer with 3 81mm;s in flight, backed up by three salvos of 3 60mm mortars all taking the high trajectory while 6 more 155mm howitzer rounds are coming in low and fast.
That's just what I was thinking. This gadget is easily defeated by simply saturating the target area with shells or better yet some form of cheap PGM once you pick up the position of the laser. IIRC the have guided artillery shells these days. It's usefulness is mostly limited to protecting vulnerable targets like Israeli border settlements and those illegal colonies they are building in the west bank territories from low volume fire. I suppose it could also be useful in a place like Afghanistan where the Taleban won't find it easy to come up with the amount of artillery resources to swamp the laser.
This news is great, we could actually see one of the oldest copies around. Part of me truly wonders how many more manuscripts (religious or not) would have been available today if people back then don't have the habit of burning every piece of paper they dislike.
Religious book burnings are only part of it. Try to imagine what went up in smoke when the great library of Alexandria burned (mostly as a result of warfare). Modern archeologists and historians find it hard to even contemplate that loss. Fortunately, once in a while we do get very, very, lucky:
Gospel of Judas, this find has sparked some interesting debate to say the least. The Oxyrhynchus papyri, not religious texts and much of the material was mundane public and private stuff like invoices, edicts and tax records but valuable to archeologists. The Villa of the Papyri, IMHO by far one of the most spectacular discoveries yet. Much of it seems to consist of Epicurean texts but who knows what else is in there. The lost works of some of the great ancient historians and scientists? One can hope...
There are probably quite a few more such finds that deserve mention. Book burning and generally all efforts to suppress and destroy written material, be it religious or secular, are among of the worst manifestations of ignorance. We are fortunate that once in a while the efforts of these zealots and vandals are undone.
You are of course ignoring the fact that Cuba wanted to launch missiles tipped with nuclear warheads at the U.S. during Kennedy's presidency.
Maybe the U.S. has had good reason to act the way it has.
I am sure that nobody actually wanted to launch them. The fact that the USSR had submarine-launched nukes slightly after that and never gave any indication that it wanted to unilaterally strike the USA proves that.
In fact for a long time the USSR had a "no first nuclear strike" policy when NATO did not.
I think it was the psychological bargaining power of having missiles so close to the USA that they wanted.
One of the things that seems to have plaid a key role in causing Khrushchev to decide to go ahead with the deployment of missiles to Cuba was a visit to the Black Sea where a Soviet general pointed out to just how close to the Soviet border the USA had stationed it's nuclear missiles in Turkey. It must have seemed to him that if the USA felt able to put nuclear missiles into the USSR's back yard then surely the US would react fairly calmly to the USSR doing the exact same thing. After all it would have been in the best traditions of the MAD arrangement to keep the capability balance in tact. I don't think that Khrushchev fully appreciated the force of the reaction he was going to get. I watched a documentary on the Cuban missile crisis recently and I found it interesting was that one of the American ex-government types they interviewed very candidly admitted that the USA has an incredible inability to realize just how provocative it's actions can potentially be to the opposition. You don't get that kind of an admission very often from politicians. The USA felt terribly provoked by missiles in Cuba and Americans remember that provocation to this day. But that begs the question exactly what was the USA thinking when they deployed those missiles to Turkey so close to the Soviet border? Did they really think the Soviets wouldn't react? A similar thing is currently happening on a smaller scale with GWB's missile shield program. The Bush regime either seem to be oblivious to what effect this missile shield is having in Moscow or they just plain don't care if it sets off another nuclear arms race. Similarly some of the US tactics during the Cuban blockade were also incredibly incautious. Take the low level overflights the Americans did over Cuba. To the Americans they may have been just recce flights born out of an honest need to obtain hard reconnaissance. Nobody seemed to consider how low level flights over Soviet nuclear sites by RF-8 recce aircraft which were essentially indistinguishable from F-8 fighter bombers would look to the Russians and the Cubans. Did Soviet tactical recon aircraft regularly buzz American nuclear weapons installations in Turkey at ultra low level? No they didn't. What would the Americans have done if they had? To this day some of the Cuban and Soviet personnel stationed on Cuba at the time are convinced that those low level flights were a deliberate attempt to provoke a war. That of course wasn't the American's intention but unfortunately real intentions matter a lot less than perceived intentions do in a tense situation like the Cuba crisis was.
That's true, they are free and as an added bonus they come preloaded with all kinds of malware. Even if you download virgin ISOs only chances are the software you use to crack your pirate bay goodies is a vessel for malware. *smirk*
Could it perhaps be that the infestation of Earth with this parasitic species called "humans" is bad for everything else?
VOICE (O.S.): Just what exactly do you think you're doing?
The Orkin Man turns around. EDGAR stands in the doorway to the garage, staring at him disdainfully.
ORKIN MAN (shrugs): Takin' care of your pest problem.
EDGAR: "Pest" problem? "Pest?"
ORKIN MAN: Yeah. You got a hell of an infestation.
Edgar advances on him, slowly.
EDGAR: You know, I have noticed an infestation here. Everywhere I look, in fact. Nothing but undeveloped, unevolved, barely conscious pond scum. So convinced of their own superiority as they scurry about their short, pointless lives.
ORKIN MAN: Well -- yeah. Don't you want to get rid of'em?
EDGAR: Oh... In the worst way.
Edgar lashes out quickly, jerking the mask off the Orkin Man's face with one hand --
-- and shoving the gas hose down his throat with the other.
1) You should always have an up to date resume. Especially when there is some kind of "restructuring" going on.
2) You can do both. Try on the new company. If you don't like it, you can always leave. You can even spin it to new employers as "I stayed on to ensure a smooth transition" to make you look like a team player. This is a great way to get into a new company without having to wade through the throngs of HR drones trying to screen you out of new-hire interviews.
3) I collect job adverts from newspapers. I know this sounds dumb, who uses newspaper adverts to find personnel these days? well some employers do and I find it is useful to do this. Even if it is only to find out who in my locality is doing.Net, Java C/C++, Web development, App development, Embedded etc.... I also like to keep regular track of what is on offer at online job centers/forums even if I am not in danger of being laid off or thinking about moving, for much the same purpose. At the very least it results in me being able to target my job search more accurately.
Jumping ship before the move is kinda dumb -- as long as they don't make you sign anything ridiculous. It could be a much better place. Why would you leave when you don't have a reason to? What would you leave for? An unknown new company? Then you are no better off then where you are right now.
In my experience when a merger or a wholesale outsourcing happens, the PHBs/corporate-weasels running the transition will either lay off the entire complement of people employed by the 'victim' or they will pick and choose. They will keep the best employees from either side and lay off a whole bunch of others. Few things get a PHB more brownie points than saving personnel/wage costs for the company. The employees that will qualify for the great "...opportunities HP has internally..." are the best and most experienced ones except maybe if this happens during an economic boom period, then you may have a better chance if you are young and less experienced. If there is one thing new arrivals on the job market should learn quickly is that companies will demand loyalty and hard work from you but reserve the right to drop you from the payroll the instant it takes their fancy do pep up their quarterly profit returns by reducing costs. Get used to being stabbed in the back a lot, recover quickly and be prepared to find a new job even before it happens. Choosing carefully what jobs you take is important not only because of the wages you will get but also because of the experience you will get. They pay may be good but can you market that experience easily next time you are looking for a job? I know a few people who fell into the trap of considering only the money.
1. The people who sign the paychecks hired you because you know what you're doing, not to be an interchangeable code monkey in need for micromanagement. (Right? If not, RUN!)
2. If you don't "force" the devs to use tools they hate, this is not an issue. If you do, there is no "time saved" to speak of, and management can do nothing about it.
Whether your statements are true really depends on whether you are running a software company as a business or as a private playground for developers. Micromanagement is bad, but no management is worse. In my experience it pays off to compromize, i.e. to give developers some freedom but at the same time subjecting them to certain rules. Leaving a bunch of software nerds 100% free to do what ever they want is a major mistake. I have had dealings with companies that failed to effectively supervise their developers and the result was usually a mess. The developers working on different components of major projects went for radically different technologies that often caused major problems or even turned out to be partly or even completely incompatible. Often they seemed to do this simply because they had never written anything in, say, Ruby and wanted to try it out. There seemed to be no concern for whether Ruby was actually the best choice for their project. Not that there is something essentially wrong with Ruby, sometimes it just isn't the best choice. Another wonderful side effect of this policy is that you end up with a portfolio of products written in an ever growing set of languages: java,.net, perl, php, ruby, c, c++ and delphi..... It's kind of like a hauling company having a fleet of 30 trucks where no two were made by the same manufacturer because they have a policy of letting the truckers choose their rides at will. There are benefits to be had from standardization of equipment. In the end even a Software company is a business and it will benefit from standardizing on certain tools and languages. It minimizes lead-in time for new developers, makes it easier to replace developers who have left the company.... the list goes on.
My mind is screwed. It immediatly thought of RMS wielding a big a big katana running like a madman through a sky darkening volley of flying chairs towards Gates and a legion of MS employees.
There, fixed that for you. How could you possibly forget the obligatory reference to flying chairs?
If your local computer guy can READ and use the internet this is a piece of cake.
I am a FNCG and I don't do HD upgrades on my MacBook Pro myself largely due to warranty issues. If I screw up something up during the installation I'm stuck with the damage but if Apple does they have to replace the machine. Upgrading desktop boxes is, of course, a different story. I don't buy parts from Apple. I can source laptop hard drives for example, from third part suppliers at about 50% of the price my local Apple dealer sells them at. Apple has yet to refuse to install the components I hand them. The last time I upgraded the HD in my MacBook Pro I wanted a 320G disk which the guy in the Apple repair workshop said they wasn't available. I came back like 45 Minutes later after finding one single computer shop in town that sold 320G laptop drives and asked they guy I talked to previously to install it. He wanted to know where I got it from but I just told him it was from another supplier in the city and that it was way cheaper than Apple's upgrade parts and that he should let me know if he could figure out where I got it. When I got the MacBook back from the shop later that day they had installed the drive and OS X but they renamed the drive after the shop where I bought it instead of the default name "Macinstoh HD"...
Ha! Where are you from? I've had people try to merge into my right side and flick me the finger when I can't move to the left anymore due to a bloody wall...
It is quite amazing how people will look in your direction and apparently see only empty space. It's especially scary when the other guy is riding in a Toyota Landcruiser, Nissan Pathfinder, Ford Explorer or some other such monstrosity. SUV drivers seem to think the size of their cars entitles them to play a game of 'squish the little cars'. I drive a VW Golf and watching the front corner of a SUV heading for your driver's side door is pretty unnerving.
It's like saying that speed cameras are at fault because people brake heavily before them. They are not, they are exposing the problem that stupid drivers have always existed and yet nothing is done about them. You should ALREADY be at the speed limit (in fact, significantly less than, in almost all circumstances). If you have to brake heavily, the problem is YOU. YOU have created the hazard yourself. In the same way, you can't "blame" a plastic bag flying in front of your car for the accident that meant you hit someone in front, who was not a safe distance away. YOU were too close. YOU shouldn't be. YOU did not have a safe braking distance between you and the car in front. The plastic bag didn't press the throttle for you or cut your brake lines.
It is amazing how many people fail to understand that. However, maintaining a safe braking distance between yourself and the car in front can be almost as dangerous as going to close. People will abruptly change lanes, usually without using the indicator light to warn other drivers of their intention or only switching on the light after they have begun changing lanes, and then proceed to cut you off. The result is all to often that you have to slam down on the brakes to avoid slamming into the car that cut you off. And that is exactly what you were trying to avoid in the first place by maintaining a safe braking distance.
Oh thanks, you just gave them reason to cavity search all geeks. Don't get so upset dude, all you have to do is follow Big Stan's example and have an alien eye tattooed around your sphincter.
. Besides which, we aren't running out of crude anytime soon anyway. Read this.Theoretically we are not going to run out of fossil fuels any time soon. The problem is that we will start to feel the crunch well before we physically run out of oil. The rate of production will start to slow and with economies like China and India growing at the rate they are doing today, demand is going to outstrip vastly out strip supply well within our lifetimes. This is going to have major economic, social and political effects which in turn, sooner or later, is going to drive massive research into alternative fuels and the adoption of these alternatives. The question is really how long before we run out of sources of oil that are so cheaply exploitable that oil and gasoline remain a cheaper option than alternative fuels.
Many fringe energy sources have become cost competitive with geological oil since it more than quadrupled in price. What will be interesting is how the oil giants respond to this competition. And the increased viability of alternative fuels seems to be a playing a role in scaring the Saudis into ramping up production.
So water may not be the only thing fueling this car. They use a chemical reaction to crack the water, and then use the hydrogen from the water and oxygen from the air to run a fuel cell. The real questions are: What is in these membranes? How long do they last? What does it cost to renew the membranes? They certainly didn't scrimp and save on publicity. They even hired Jason Voorhees to drive their car!
'13 reasons why Ruby, Python and the gang will push Java to die... of old age' People will continue to postulate that Java is dying just as they have done for years with C/C++ but I'm still willing to bet that in 15 years Java will still be a major player. When a language has achieved the kind of presence in both businesses and the FOSS community world wide that Java and C/C++ have, it is going to be a lot easier to confidently claim that Python & Co. will kill these languages off than it will be to actually do the deed. I'm sure that a number of developers will go over to Python, Ruby & Co. and thus erode the market share of Java but to say that Java will 'die of old' age is stupid. Hell we are still trying to squeeze the life out of COBOL.... with limited success I might add. I know a number of people who get paid good money to write COBOL code.
Slashdot Mirror
And did you ever see a pick-up truck in europe as means of personal transport?
I drove from Denmark (Copenhagen) to Switzerland (Bern) recently. I was in Frankfurt am Main before I ran into the first American style 'big ass' SUV pickup. Europeans often drive smaller hatchbacks. The VW Fox/Polo/Golf, Opel Corsa and Peugeot 107/207 seem to be particularly popular in Germany and so are bigger saloon cars from makers like the BMW, Audi, Mazda, VW, Opel, Skoda, Citroen... the list goes on. You also get some CUVs. Subaru and Suzuki are popular in rural areas because they build even small hatchbacks and saloons with a 4x4 drive. Gigantic American style SUVs are pretty much a rarity. You probably wouldn't have an easy time navigating something like a Dodge Ram through many European cities, towns and villages (especially the model with the double rear wheels that requires two parking spaces). In many of these places the streets date back to medieval times and are very narrow. Another point is of course the fact that gas prices are high and people can generally think of better things to spend their money on than quenching an SUV's thirst for fuel. I drive a small 3 door diesel hatchback. On may way through Denmark the clerk at a Statiol station got the pumps mixed up and tried to bill me for the Diesel tanked by a small SUV. I was really shocked to see the size of the bill which was about 4 times what I had just tanked for (about 180 DKR and the tank on my car was 2/3 empty). I shudder to think what it wold cost to fill up the tank on a Dodge Ram.
... Shooting one 81 doesn't impress me, shooting 3 fired in a ripple that's getting interesting; shoot down 3 fired at the same time I'm impressed, but remember real world is going to be somebody see all the loud IR energy pointing at the laser source and they are likely to answer with 3 81mm;s in flight, backed up by three salvos of 3 60mm mortars all taking the high trajectory while 6 more 155mm howitzer rounds are coming in low and fast.
That's just what I was thinking. This gadget is easily defeated by simply saturating the target area with shells or better yet some form of cheap PGM once you pick up the position of the laser. IIRC the have guided artillery shells these days. It's usefulness is mostly limited to protecting vulnerable targets like Israeli border settlements and those illegal colonies they are building in the west bank territories from low volume fire. I suppose it could also be useful in a place like Afghanistan where the Taleban won't find it easy to come up with the amount of artillery resources to swamp the laser.
This news is great, we could actually see one of the oldest copies around. Part of me truly wonders how many more manuscripts (religious or not) would have been available today if people back then don't have the habit of burning every piece of paper they dislike.
Religious book burnings are only part of it. Try to imagine what went up in smoke when the great library of Alexandria burned (mostly as a result of warfare). Modern archeologists and historians find it hard to even contemplate that loss. Fortunately, once in a while we do get very, very, lucky:
The Oxyrhynchus papyri, not religious texts and much of the material was mundane public and private stuff like invoices, edicts and tax records but valuable to archeologists.
The Villa of the Papyri, IMHO by far one of the most spectacular discoveries yet. Much of it seems to consist of Epicurean texts but who knows what else is in there. The lost works of some of the great ancient historians and scientists? One can hope...
There are probably quite a few more such finds that deserve mention. Book burning and generally all efforts to suppress and destroy written material, be it religious or secular, are among of the worst manifestations of ignorance. We are fortunate that once in a while the efforts of these zealots and vandals are undone.
...the hassle with women.
It seems you made a mistake in your post, I've gone ahead and fixed it though.
Why don't you two just stop complaining and fix the problem once and for all by writing a proper manpage on women?
...and general lack of design?
I think they are getting some fierce competition from Dell on that last one.
....you'd think that for porn "fast power-off times" would be more important than "fast boot times".
That and replacing the CD drive with a tissue dispenser.
You are of course ignoring the fact that Cuba wanted to launch missiles tipped with nuclear warheads at the U.S. during Kennedy's presidency.
Maybe the U.S. has had good reason to act the way it has.
I am sure that nobody actually wanted to launch them. The fact that the USSR had submarine-launched nukes slightly after that and never gave any indication that it wanted to unilaterally strike the USA proves that.
In fact for a long time the USSR had a "no first nuclear strike" policy when NATO did not.
I think it was the psychological bargaining power of having missiles so close to the USA that they wanted.
One of the things that seems to have plaid a key role in causing Khrushchev to decide to go ahead with the deployment of missiles to Cuba was a visit to the Black Sea where a Soviet general pointed out to just how close to the Soviet border the USA had stationed it's nuclear missiles in Turkey. It must have seemed to him that if the USA felt able to put nuclear missiles into the USSR's back yard then surely the US would react fairly calmly to the USSR doing the exact same thing. After all it would have been in the best traditions of the MAD arrangement to keep the capability balance in tact. I don't think that Khrushchev fully appreciated the force of the reaction he was going to get. I watched a documentary on the Cuban missile crisis recently and I found it interesting was that one of the American ex-government types they interviewed very candidly admitted that the USA has an incredible inability to realize just how provocative it's actions can potentially be to the opposition. You don't get that kind of an admission very often from politicians. The USA felt terribly provoked by missiles in Cuba and Americans remember that provocation to this day. But that begs the question exactly what was the USA thinking when they deployed those missiles to Turkey so close to the Soviet border? Did they really think the Soviets wouldn't react? A similar thing is currently happening on a smaller scale with GWB's missile shield program. The Bush regime either seem to be oblivious to what effect this missile shield is having in Moscow or they just plain don't care if it sets off another nuclear arms race. Similarly some of the US tactics during the Cuban blockade were also incredibly incautious. Take the low level overflights the Americans did over Cuba. To the Americans they may have been just recce flights born out of an honest need to obtain hard reconnaissance. Nobody seemed to consider how low level flights over Soviet nuclear sites by RF-8 recce aircraft which were essentially indistinguishable from F-8 fighter bombers would look to the Russians and the Cubans. Did Soviet tactical recon aircraft regularly buzz American nuclear weapons installations in Turkey at ultra low level? No they didn't. What would the Americans have done if they had? To this day some of the Cuban and Soviet personnel stationed on Cuba at the time are convinced that those low level flights were a deliberate attempt to provoke a war. That of course wasn't the American's intention but unfortunately real intentions matter a lot less than perceived intentions do in a tense situation like the Cuba crisis was.
Just my two cents...
Never gotten malware from TPB. Maybe you just suck at identifying or protecting yourself from malware. *smirk*
No I don't. I run Unix. *smirk*.
Downloads on the pirate bay cost $700? *smirk*
That's true, they are free and as an added bonus they come preloaded with all kinds of malware. Even if you download virgin ISOs only chances are the software you use to crack your pirate bay goodies is a vessel for malware. *smirk*
Why don't you just ask him to build you a working warp core while your at it :)
You must be the only one here who isn't working on one...
Could it perhaps be that the infestation of Earth with this parasitic species called "humans" is bad for everything else?
VOICE (O.S.): Just what exactly do you think you're doing?
The Orkin Man turns around. EDGAR stands in the doorway to the garage,
staring at him disdainfully.
ORKIN MAN (shrugs): Takin' care of your pest problem.
EDGAR: "Pest" problem? "Pest?"
ORKIN MAN: Yeah. You got a hell of an infestation.
Edgar advances on him, slowly.
EDGAR: You know, I have noticed an infestation here. Everywhere I look, in fact. Nothing but undeveloped, unevolved, barely conscious pond scum. So convinced of their own superiority as they scurry about their short, pointless lives.
ORKIN MAN: Well -- yeah. Don't you want to get rid of'em?
EDGAR: Oh... In the worst way.
Edgar lashes out quickly, jerking the mask off the Orkin Man's face with
one hand --
-- and shoving the gas hose down his throat with the other.
1) You should always have an up to date resume. Especially when there is some kind of "restructuring" going on.
2) You can do both. Try on the new company. If you don't like it, you can always leave. You can even spin it to new employers as "I stayed on to ensure a smooth transition" to make you look like a team player. This is a great way to get into a new company without having to wade through the throngs of HR drones trying to screen you out of new-hire interviews.
3) I collect job adverts from newspapers. I know this sounds dumb, who uses newspaper adverts to find personnel these days? well some employers do and I find it is useful to do this. Even if it is only to find out who in my locality is doing .Net, Java C/C++, Web development, App development, Embedded etc.... I also like to keep regular track of what is on offer at online job centers/forums even if I am not in danger of being laid off or thinking about moving, for much the same purpose. At the very least it results in me being able to target my job search more accurately.
Jumping ship before the move is kinda dumb -- as long as they don't make you sign anything ridiculous. It could be a much better place. Why would you leave when you don't have a reason to? What would you leave for? An unknown new company? Then you are no better off then where you are right now.
In my experience when a merger or a wholesale outsourcing happens, the PHBs/corporate-weasels running the transition will either lay off the entire complement of people employed by the 'victim' or they will pick and choose. They will keep the best employees from either side and lay off a whole bunch of others. Few things get a PHB more brownie points than saving personnel/wage costs for the company. The employees that will qualify for the great "...opportunities HP has internally..." are the best and most experienced ones except maybe if this happens during an economic boom period, then you may have a better chance if you are young and less experienced. If there is one thing new arrivals on the job market should learn quickly is that companies will demand loyalty and hard work from you but reserve the right to drop you from the payroll the instant it takes their fancy do pep up their quarterly profit returns by reducing costs. Get used to being stabbed in the back a lot, recover quickly and be prepared to find a new job even before it happens. Choosing carefully what jobs you take is important not only because of the wages you will get but also because of the experience you will get. They pay may be good but can you market that experience easily next time you are looking for a job? I know a few people who fell into the trap of considering only the money.
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
1. The people who sign the paychecks hired you because you know what you're doing, not to be an interchangeable code monkey in need for micromanagement. (Right? If not, RUN!)
2. If you don't "force" the devs to use tools they hate, this is not an issue. If you do, there is no "time saved" to speak of, and management can do nothing about it.
Whether your statements are true really depends on whether you are running a software company as a business or as a private playground for developers. Micromanagement is bad, but no management is worse. In my experience it pays off to compromize, i.e. to give developers some freedom but at the same time subjecting them to certain rules. Leaving a bunch of software nerds 100% free to do what ever they want is a major mistake. I have had dealings with companies that failed to effectively supervise their developers and the result was usually a mess. The developers working on different components of major projects went for radically different technologies that often caused major problems or even turned out to be partly or even completely incompatible. Often they seemed to do this simply because they had never written anything in, say, Ruby and wanted to try it out. There seemed to be no concern for whether Ruby was actually the best choice for their project. Not that there is something essentially wrong with Ruby, sometimes it just isn't the best choice. Another wonderful side effect of this policy is that you end up with a portfolio of products written in an ever growing set of languages: java, .net, perl, php, ruby, c, c++ and delphi..... It's kind of like a hauling company having a fleet of 30 trucks where no two were made by the same manufacturer because they have a policy of letting the truckers choose their rides at will. There are benefits to be had from standardization of equipment. In the end even a Software company is a business and it will benefit from standardizing on certain tools and languages. It minimizes lead-in time for new developers, makes it easier to replace developers who have left the company.... the list goes on.
My mind is screwed. It immediatly thought of RMS wielding a big a big katana running like a madman through a sky darkening volley of flying chairs towards Gates and a legion of MS employees.
There, fixed that for you. How could you possibly forget the obligatory reference to flying chairs?
If your local computer guy can READ and use the internet this is a piece of cake.
I am a FNCG and I don't do HD upgrades on my MacBook Pro myself largely due to warranty issues. If I screw up something up during the installation I'm stuck with the damage but if Apple does they have to replace the machine. Upgrading desktop boxes is, of course, a different story. I don't buy parts from Apple. I can source laptop hard drives for example, from third part suppliers at about 50% of the price my local Apple dealer sells them at. Apple has yet to refuse to install the components I hand them. The last time I upgraded the HD in my MacBook Pro I wanted a 320G disk which the guy in the Apple repair workshop said they wasn't available. I came back like 45 Minutes later after finding one single computer shop in town that sold 320G laptop drives and asked they guy I talked to previously to install it. He wanted to know where I got it from but I just told him it was from another supplier in the city and that it was way cheaper than Apple's upgrade parts and that he should let me know if he could figure out where I got it. When I got the MacBook back from the shop later that day they had installed the drive and OS X but they renamed the drive after the shop where I bought it instead of the default name "Macinstoh HD"...
Ha! Where are you from? I've had people try to merge into my right side and flick me the finger when I can't move to the left anymore due to a bloody wall...
It is quite amazing how people will look in your direction and apparently see only empty space. It's especially scary when the other guy is riding in a Toyota Landcruiser, Nissan Pathfinder, Ford Explorer or some other such monstrosity. SUV drivers seem to think the size of their cars entitles them to play a game of 'squish the little cars'. I drive a VW Golf and watching the front corner of a SUV heading for your driver's side door is pretty unnerving.
It's like saying that speed cameras are at fault because people brake heavily before them. They are not, they are exposing the problem that stupid drivers have always existed and yet nothing is done about them. You should ALREADY be at the speed limit (in fact, significantly less than, in almost all circumstances). If you have to brake heavily, the problem is YOU. YOU have created the hazard yourself. In the same way, you can't "blame" a plastic bag flying in front of your car for the accident that meant you hit someone in front, who was not a safe distance away. YOU were too close. YOU shouldn't be. YOU did not have a safe braking distance between you and the car in front. The plastic bag didn't press the throttle for you or cut your brake lines.
It is amazing how many people fail to understand that. However, maintaining a safe braking distance between yourself and the car in front can be almost as dangerous as going to close. People will abruptly change lanes, usually without using the indicator light to warn other drivers of their intention or only switching on the light after they have begun changing lanes, and then proceed to cut you off. The result is all to often that you have to slam down on the brakes to avoid slamming into the car that cut you off. And that is exactly what you were trying to avoid in the first place by maintaining a safe braking distance.