60%-80% of all a company's information are stored in documents.
Paper documents have no automated way to enforce document retention standards (just ask Enron and Arthur Anderson)
Paper documents have no way to search the documents to enter the data in the "corporate memory". Infinitely valuable information is never cataloged and reviewed
The reason organizations don't manage this better is most document management syetems are very difficult and expensive to own.
This article takes a reactionary stance to try to promote (another useless) management philosphy and sell a book.
I want to write a book entitled "The Myth of the Management Book That's Not Full Of Crap".
It's not her fault, it's the 'software engineers' at Microsoft who had the knowledge, background, and ability to have made an interface that did NOT execute an executive email attachment so easily!
No, it's the fault of the scumbags who wrote the virus.
Very good point. Software license fees are a tiny part of what desktop technology costs a large enterprise. Companies will switch when those TCO numbers come down. And they WILL switch - just not because of license fees.
Right now, owning Linux means more developers on staff, which means more cost. On top of that is the tremendous cost of re-education, re-engineering. That's just the facts. It has nothing to do with the quality of one OS over the other.
WHat people use at work is what they are almost certainly goingt to use at home. Once you change that, anything is possible.
"Engineering to me means no vision, no skill and no insight. Just following the orders, sir."
I am nowhere near articulate enough to adequately express how immensely stupid this statement is.
BTW, IANAE (i am not an engineer)
Re:Beauty for beauty's sake makes crappy software
on
Software Aesthetics
·
· Score: 1
Let's also remember this: A bridge has one function: don't fall down while people drive across it.
When software gets ugly is when the pointy-haired boss (or client) says "great but can you make it...work under NT4...cross reference our live market data feed...can you put a button here that orders chinese food...and calculates the MSG by grams and ounces and files the report with the EPA...by next week without letting the date slip or increasing the budget...and by the way make it all mauve (apologies to dilbert) AND THE DEVELOPER AGREES TO DO IT.
DEVELOPERS LEARN THIS WORD: N-O. It'll be your best friend.
Re:I know it's always fun to whip PHMs, but...
on
Software Aesthetics
·
· Score: 1
"would you buy a house or a car or a bridge if you had to agree that total failure of same was just tough titty for you, and the manufacturer had no liability? Of course not. "
1) House: $200,000
2) Car: $18,000
3) Bridge: $(no idea but a lot I imagine)
4) Software: $79
Therein lies the rub
disclaimer - I run a software development company, so I guess I'm biased...
Slashdot Mirror
60%-80% of all a company's information are stored in documents.
Paper documents have no automated way to enforce document retention standards (just ask Enron and Arthur Anderson)
Paper documents have no way to search the documents to enter the data in the "corporate memory". Infinitely valuable information is never cataloged and reviewed
The reason organizations don't manage this better is most document management syetems are very difficult and expensive to own.
This article takes a reactionary stance to try to promote (another useless) management philosphy and sell a book.
I want to write a book entitled "The Myth of the Management Book That's Not Full Of Crap".
But no one would read it.
It's not her fault, it's the 'software engineers' at Microsoft who had the knowledge, background, and ability to have made an interface that did NOT execute an executive email attachment so easily!
No, it's the fault of the scumbags who wrote the virus.
Is it possible that this is like books, where the charts are based on the retail orders and not the consumer units?
Very good point. Software license fees are a tiny part of what desktop technology costs a large enterprise. Companies will switch when those TCO numbers come down. And they WILL switch - just not because of license fees.
Right now, owning Linux means more developers on staff, which means more cost. On top of that is the tremendous cost of re-education, re-engineering. That's just the facts. It has nothing to do with the quality of one OS over the other.
WHat people use at work is what they are almost certainly goingt to use at home. Once you change that, anything is possible.
"Engineering to me means no vision, no skill and no insight. Just following the orders, sir."
I am nowhere near articulate enough to adequately express how immensely stupid this statement is.
BTW, IANAE (i am not an engineer)
Let's also remember this: A bridge has one function: don't fall down while people drive across it.
When software gets ugly is when the pointy-haired boss (or client) says "great but can you make it...work under NT4...cross reference our live market data feed...can you put a button here that orders chinese food...and calculates the MSG by grams and ounces and files the report with the EPA...by next week without letting the date slip or increasing the budget...and by the way make it all mauve (apologies to dilbert) AND THE DEVELOPER AGREES TO DO IT.
DEVELOPERS LEARN THIS WORD: N-O. It'll be your best friend.
"would you buy a house or a car or a bridge if you had to agree that total failure of same was just tough titty for you, and the manufacturer had no liability? Of course not. "
1) House: $200,000
2) Car: $18,000
3) Bridge: $(no idea but a lot I imagine)
4) Software: $79
Therein lies the rub
disclaimer - I run a software development company, so I guess I'm biased...