...65,000 is well within range of surface to air missile systems from the 1950's onwards. It is also well within range of nearly all radar guided air to air missiles, many infrared active/passive missiles when carried to altitude on an aircraft, and within the service and dynamic ceilings for common military aircraft.
If you don't like cars or offroading and someone produced a perfect warthog replica, I would certainly think you wouldn't be interested. Of course you won't like an RTS based on Halo if you don't like RTS games... I would think that this is so obvious that I didn't need to make mention of it.
The whole point of my post is that this RTS isn't doing anything new, it's simply rebranding the stardard RTS experience with 'Halo.'
...same exact formula as a million other RTS games, just branded with Halo; ergo, if you like Halo, this is probably an excellent game - otherwise it's like many others that came before it. If you've not played many RTS games, this one probably has polish, so pick it.
...do the 're-image' thing in order to periodically ensure that the machines are clean.
Users keep their data on the network, and the machine get's 'updated' every week or so. Coincidentally (heavy sarcasm here please) everything on the machine gets wiped and set to a known state when the . Now, this is something that I know a VERY large company does in at least one large division, but it allows them to have both Windows and Linux boxes throughout the system. Their overhead though is in testing the new images (because they contain updates) against the myriad of machines they use.
Now, again, this is something a very large company currently does. Technically they don't re-image the entire drive either, but they do control the portion that can connect to the corporate network very closely. This requires a team of people in IT devoted to just this process, constantly; ergo, it is expensive.
Yep. To see if they're still doing it I asked iTunes to update and lo and behold, the Apple Software Updater comes up and lists Bonjour and iTunes in the top half of the dialog, and near the bottom, off on its own, is 'Safari' 23MB (iirc) download, already pre-checked for me. Hmmm... I wonder if I had automatic updating configured if it would simply show up on my machine? LOL.
Actually, it just did when I just updated iTunes about 15 minutes ago. I do NOT have Safari on this machine and it had ticked Safari as a 23MB (iirc) 'update' that was in the bottom half of the dialog off on its own. Nice of them to check mark that download for my own good, eh?;)
Why would you want a smart phone if you don't want flash or java on it? You must like the idea of being locked into some ridiculous environment like Objective C... If you're arguing that you don't need a smart phone, I agree, I don't either, but if your phone is supposed to run software to help you do things other than receive/send calls, you would obviously be better served with technologies that are not locked in or have small developer bases. Right?
...because what am I supposed to do if I'm an Android dev (which I am intermittently) and a customer wants to know why there's a problem with my application and another application when my application used to work fine...? We must be in a perfect world now.
...seriously, why don't people just either burn their money or donate it directly to Apple? No flash? No Java? Apple decides whether or not someone can sell/distribute an application? Have to buy a Crapintosh to develop for it?
Why do people accept this kind of behavior from Apple, but not other companies? Weird...
This is exactly right. There are quite a few precedents regarding employers doing anything other than confirming objective information in regards to an employment inquiry.
As an aside, it is quite possible that no one above your manager (presuming it was he/she that threatened you) is aware of this stupid intimidation tactic.
You MAY wish to obtain copies of your reviews and other praises prior to leaving the company.
Is is privately held by a member of the company itself? Is it funded by a group of investors? Is there a board? Is there an advisory board?
Is this a grant offer or are they options? (This can be very important from a tax liability point of view) What does the company value itself at? (This is germane to the above)
What types of stock does your company issue? (Not all stock is the same) Are there anti-dilution clauses? (This is VERY important and if not, you can use this to negotiate for more shares)
Each case is individual, but in the end it really comes down to two things:
(1)Do you believe that the company is viable over the long term? (2)Do you believe that your current management will (a)not screw you and (b)have the authority in the company to ensure neither they nor you get screwed.
What you do NOT want to happen is that you commit to something that is a hard tangible reality (5 years of work) for something that is not in any way a hard tangible reality (shares w/o anti-dilution) based upon the people working there now and then in 6 months your board removes your President or CEO and replaces them with some a**hat who could care less who you are.
Really. When I re-joined my old company I received a bunch of spam at first; however, within a week I'd weeded it out. Maybe they mean "spam for the layperson is still a serious issue if they fail to use a spam prevention method...";)
... No self respecting person with a competent technical background would ever stoop to making their living regurgitating phrases like "win/win" and "low hanging fruit". Go with the CISCO chick with the wicked cool name:).
...to run 'generic' GPU applications. They just make things simpler for people not used to working with GPUs. Back in 2005 (can't recall) I wrote a computer vision algorithm (a simple multi-gaussian system) that uploaded live security video as a set of conglomerated images in a given texture size and output motion maps, just using early pixel shaders on an ATI 9700PRO (old even at the time.) It wasn't hard, although faking arrays via textures was a pain in the rear.;)
No offense, but I think we differe a bit on what we term a 'product.' Google docs is a great start to a possible future product; unfortunately, it has egregious shorcomings. Does Google say its ready? No, so it's ok that it's missing incredibly basic features (see http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/google_docs_fail.php for an example of many ridiculous things you cannot do - although Google has fixed a couple of these over the past year.) The spreadsheet app is the best of the lot from Google and it still needs TONS of work to be an actual product (ignoring the very serious issues of expecting people to trust a public company with private data more than they have to.)
Do you realize how many engineers Google actually has?;) Google should really create a new product line/direction and become seriously devoted to it. Can you imagine, with the talent Google has, what they could do with Open Office (or build a new platform with the same goal) or if they wanted to obliterate Exchange Server? Unfortunately, this is not (as far as I can tell) Google's goal. Google's goal is search, search infrastructure, and fun little add-ons like gMail, simulations, Google docs, et cetera.
Google isn't looking for a real product to build, they're looking for cool things to attract users to Google to bolster search revenue. That doesn't mean they wouldn't ever build a serious product other than Search, but the culture would (apparently) have to change to do so. It's hard to be competitive if your engineers spend 20% of their time on something other than the product you want to deliver and you can't simply scale a software engineering project by adding people. It's a careful balance.
...with absolutely f*** all to do right now as we only have one real product, search, and we're hesitant to make big changes to it... Please give us the ideas we obviously cannot think up on our own so we can give these guys/gals something to do because bored smart people tend to leave no matter how good the bennies are.";)
Slashdot Mirror
Ugh... My grammar is suspect as well 'their' (apologies.)
...Red Hat's reasoning is suspect, as is there motivation.
...65,000 is well within range of surface to air missile systems from the 1950's onwards. It is also well within range of nearly all radar guided air to air missiles, many infrared active/passive missiles when carried to altitude on an aircraft, and within the service and dynamic ceilings for common military aircraft.
I bet that the Wii would have a much better interface which could map quite easily to a mouse.
Ummm... how - what?
If you don't like cars or offroading and someone produced a perfect warthog replica, I would certainly think you wouldn't be interested.
Of course you won't like an RTS based on Halo if you don't like RTS games... I would think that this is so obvious that I didn't need to make mention of it.
The whole point of my post is that this RTS isn't doing anything new, it's simply rebranding the stardard RTS experience with 'Halo.'
...same exact formula as a million other RTS games, just branded with Halo; ergo, if you like Halo, this is probably an excellent game - otherwise it's like many others that came before it. If you've not played many RTS games, this one probably has polish, so pick it.
...do the 're-image' thing in order to periodically ensure that the machines are clean.
Users keep their data on the network, and the machine get's 'updated' every week or so. Coincidentally (heavy sarcasm here please) everything on the machine gets wiped and set to a known state when the . Now, this is something that I know a VERY large company does in at least one large division, but it allows them to have both Windows and Linux boxes throughout the system. Their overhead though is in testing the new images (because they contain updates) against the myriad of machines they use.
Now, again, this is something a very large company currently does. Technically they don't re-image the entire drive either, but they do control the portion that can connect to the corporate network very closely. This requires a team of people in IT devoted to just this process, constantly; ergo, it is expensive.
Yep. To see if they're still doing it I asked iTunes to update and lo and behold, the Apple Software Updater comes up and lists Bonjour and iTunes in the top half of the dialog, and near the bottom, off on its own, is 'Safari' 23MB (iirc) download, already pre-checked for me. Hmmm... I wonder if I had automatic updating configured if it would simply show up on my machine? LOL.
Actually, it just did when I just updated iTunes about 15 minutes ago. I do NOT have Safari on this machine and it had ticked Safari as a 23MB (iirc) 'update' that was in the bottom half of the dialog off on its own. Nice of them to check mark that download for my own good, eh? ;)
Just curious because that's the kind of thing people lambast Micro$oft for...
Why would you want a smart phone if you don't want flash or java on it? You must like the idea of being locked into some ridiculous environment like Objective C... If you're arguing that you don't need a smart phone, I agree, I don't either, but if your phone is supposed to run software to help you do things other than receive/send calls, you would obviously be better served with technologies that are not locked in or have small developer bases. Right?
...because what am I supposed to do if I'm an Android dev (which I am intermittently) and a customer wants to know why there's a problem with my application and another application when my application used to work fine...? We must be in a perfect world now.
...seriously, why don't people just either burn their money or donate it directly to Apple? No flash? No Java? Apple decides whether or not someone can sell/distribute an application? Have to buy a Crapintosh to develop for it?
Why do people accept this kind of behavior from Apple, but not other companies? Weird...
This is exactly right. There are quite a few precedents regarding employers doing anything other than confirming objective information in regards to an employment inquiry.
As an aside, it is quite possible that no one above your manager (presuming it was he/she that threatened you) is aware of this stupid intimidation tactic.
You MAY wish to obtain copies of your reviews and other praises prior to leaving the company.
...about your company.
Is is privately held by a member of the company itself?
Is it funded by a group of investors?
Is there a board?
Is there an advisory board?
Is this a grant offer or are they options? (This can be very important from a tax liability point of view)
What does the company value itself at? (This is germane to the above)
What types of stock does your company issue? (Not all stock is the same)
Are there anti-dilution clauses? (This is VERY important and if not, you can use this to negotiate for more shares)
Each case is individual, but in the end it really comes down to two things:
(1)Do you believe that the company is viable over the long term?
(2)Do you believe that your current management will (a)not screw you and (b)have the authority in the company to ensure neither they nor you get screwed.
What you do NOT want to happen is that you commit to something that is a hard tangible reality (5 years of work) for something that is not in any way a hard tangible reality (shares w/o anti-dilution) based upon the people working there now and then in 6 months your board removes your President or CEO and replaces them with some a**hat who could care less who you are.
...Server 2010, Server 2010 Web Edition, et cetera, ad infinitum, ad nauseum... LOL.
Why can't it just be Home, Pro, Server? Nothing like confusing people into buying more out of the fear they'll lose someone useful...
Really. When I re-joined my old company I received a bunch of spam at first; however, within a week I'd weeded it out. Maybe they mean "spam for the layperson is still a serious issue if they fail to use a spam prevention method..." ;)
...the Devil was seen shopping for skis recently...
... No self respecting person with a competent technical background would ever stoop to making their living regurgitating phrases like "win/win" and "low hanging fruit". Go with the CISCO chick with the wicked cool name :).
...to run 'generic' GPU applications. They just make things simpler for people not used to working with GPUs. Back in 2005 (can't recall) I wrote a computer vision algorithm (a simple multi-gaussian system) that uploaded live security video as a set of conglomerated images in a given texture size and output motion maps, just using early pixel shaders on an ATI 9700PRO (old even at the time.) It wasn't hard, although faking arrays via textures was a pain in the rear. ;)
No offense, but I think we differe a bit on what we term a 'product.' Google docs is a great start to a possible future product; unfortunately, it has egregious shorcomings. Does Google say its ready? No, so it's ok that it's missing incredibly basic features (see http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/google_docs_fail.php for an example of many ridiculous things you cannot do - although Google has fixed a couple of these over the past year.) The spreadsheet app is the best of the lot from Google and it still needs TONS of work to be an actual product (ignoring the very serious issues of expecting people to trust a public company with private data more than they have to.)
What a truckload of nonsense. What 'product', not entirely related to search, does Google have?
Do you realize how many engineers Google actually has? ;) Google should really create a new product line/direction and become seriously devoted to it. Can you imagine, with the talent Google has, what they could do with Open Office (or build a new platform with the same goal) or if they wanted to obliterate Exchange Server? Unfortunately, this is not (as far as I can tell) Google's goal. Google's goal is search, search infrastructure, and fun little add-ons like gMail, simulations, Google docs, et cetera.
Google isn't looking for a real product to build, they're looking for cool things to attract users to Google to bolster search revenue. That doesn't mean they wouldn't ever build a serious product other than Search, but the culture would (apparently) have to change to do so. It's hard to be competitive if your engineers spend 20% of their time on something other than the product you want to deliver and you can't simply scale a software engineering project by adding people. It's a careful balance.
...The Aristocrats... Ba-dum-dum...
...with absolutely f*** all to do right now as we only have one real product, search, and we're hesitant to make big changes to it... Please give us the ideas we obviously cannot think up on our own so we can give these guys/gals something to do because bored smart people tend to leave no matter how good the bennies are." ;)