"Specifically, MS leaves out certain functionality for "strategic" reasons that essentially leave the Mac platform lacking in certain specific areas. Outlook, anyone? Java-enabled Web browsing anyone? There are other examples as well. What you end up with is well written software with what I call "strategic holes" in it."
I am so not being dense. Okay, maybe I am.
But what kind of business strategy would lead a company to intentionally leave holes in software? I'm no businessman and I'm no economist, but to me, that just doesn't make sense. Doesn't mean Microsoft doesn't intentionally leave holes in...say...Outlook (see my post above,) but at first glance and without more supporting information, it simply doesn't make good business sense.
For me and for my company, I'd love like all heck to see decent custom forms support in the Mac version of OL. And while I haven't heard any other specific complaints from the Mac users in our shop, I'm sure there are other holes they'd like filled.
Again, maybe I'm being dense or shortsighted, but filling this particular "hole" in Outlook would do little to nothing to our purchase of PCs and Microsoft products. In other words, we wouldn't (and really *couldn't*) switch the entire plant over to Macs just because the Macs could now utilize custom forms in OL. We have an entire data collection, order entry and billing system that's Windows-based, for one thing.
Why would a software company leave "strategic" holes in an application?
Oh, don't mind me. I'm just doing my part to get a release of Outlook for OSX that'll render the custom forms I've created. It's my mantra. It's my prayer. Perhaps someone at MacBU is listening...
A plumber is not a low-skilled worker. At least not where I come from. They're highly skilled, actually and yes, well paid. Plus, you seem to be confusing "self-employed" with "unemployed."
The only thing technology gave people such as plumbers (okay, I'm gonna beat your bad analogy to death, sorry) is an inexpensive method of communicating. And before cell phones, they had radio dispatch or a voice mail system. And before that, you had to wait until the guy got all his messages at the end of the day, I suppose. But this didn't make him more employable or more skilled as a plumber. It made him more productive. It was a communication tool, not a plumbing training course.
But that's really why your analogy is bad. You grabbed a group of skilled workers and gave them cell phones. Now try this, grab a group of *truly* *unskilled* workers - perhaps people who don't have the education to read their native language and give them a cell phone or a computer. What then? How does even an inexpensive computer help someone who can't read? It can't. Not in a vacuum. That truly unskilled person will need help with *reading.* That's a skill that can't be taught just by plunking down the computer on a table or handing that person a cell phone.
Technology does not magically impart skills upon the unskilled or education upon the uneducated.
The Missouri no call list is fantastic. I've extolled its virtues to many of my friends and neighbors. Since both of my land lines (a personal line and a fax line that SWBT doesn't know is a business line...heheh...) are on the attorney general's list, I've recieved very few telemarketing calls. And the ones I've received were probably from companies that are exempt - credit card companies, for example.
Plus, Missouri prosecutes violators. Gotta love that.
However, as far as I know, the Missouri law does not cover cell phones. In fact, we tried to put our cell on the list, the no-call folks called back and said that since it was a cell, it couldn't be on the list. But - as other posters have pointed out - I believe that in my area cell phones are automatically off of call lists anyway. And in the case of my specific area, the *area* *code* may be the same as land lines, but the *exchange* (that second set of 3 numbers) is different for cells. Thus marking cell numbers and putting them out of bounds for telemarketers.
We've not recieved one solitary telemarketing call on our cell.
"huh? You can't rewind it? Why not?" Yes, that actually happened to someone I know.
Happens to me every day. Three kids, all under age 6. All used to video or dvd for their movies. Sometimes we watch a movie "on TV." And that's when it gets confusing for them. They hate, hate, hate commercial content and don't understand why the commercials are there in the first place and why we can't at least FF through them.
"I think it's safe to say that having more money than you need makes it easier to be less cautious in your spending."
This does make sense to me.
Back in BC* I made less money, but lived well below my means. While I owned my own house, the mortgage payment was ridiculously low, car payment same, nothing to do but play and buy my spouse expensive gifts. Spouse bought same.
We did save. We're not complete...erm...idiots. But we had more money, fewer obligations, and therefore, we spent some of it like fools.
I don't know that this kind of spending is the mark of the young, childless and well-off. I work with people over age 45 with older children who still live paycheck to paycheck because of their SUVs and DVD collections. Some folks never learn.
You've at least seen the light. Keep digging yourself out. Then you'll have the best of all worlds, money now, money later, early retirement.
Oh, I see...you make it a point to buy flour and sugar in single-color packages and then you bake your own cookies. You live a print-free life. You're a hermit. You somehow manage to completely avoid the 4th largest contributor to the US GNP.
For what it's worth, the phrase that can strike fear in any prepress dept's heart is: "...it's just a simple one-color job..."
(Lately our black-only cheap-and-cheezy stuff has been going to a Canon high-speed toner on paper printer that probably cost more than any of us will make before retirement.)
"Why not just let those users that have a need to send large files to each other do it with email."
Actually, that's what I do. We have a prepress-specific email address set up that our customers use for emailing files to us. WE have no attachment restrictions or limits. It's the limitations that customers may have that give us fits.
Well, I do have storage limits for individual users' email accounts, here. But not for the prepress account in particular.
If I were to be totally honest, the email solution works well. What I don't "get" is why FTP is seemingly so difficult for our customers to grasp. I read the posts about scripting the FTP uploads, etc. But I don't think it should be necessary to further simplify something that is already very simple. I've used command-line, CuteFTP and Fetch and they're just not that difficult to use. And I ain't all that bright.
"Maintaining seperate accounts on the ftp server for their customers is possible, but really not that practical. Email is a better solution."
Now here's a situation that I thankfully don't have to deal with. So far, we haven't had customers request any more privacy than our one general non-anonymous user logon (all of our customers use the same username and pass.) They can see each other's files when they're using our FTP site. (We get more sensitive jobs on CD or other media.)
But I can see where this could be an issue in the future for us and how a magazine would definitely want separate user accounts. We're also going to a "soft" on-line proofing system that will require individual user logons.
One company that has a printing-specific solution for this is Xinet with their WebNative application (or suite of applications.) It's literally been years since I read/heard/had a clue about Xinet's offerings, but I will probably have to get up to speed here very soon.
"Do these people not have FTP? Is their IT department asleep at the wheel?"
Don't blame the IT people for this. An FTP site that is easily accessible by internal prepress production and the outside designer isn't a guarantee that anyone will have a clue how to use it.
I'm the "IT guy" (heh...) at a mid-sized commercial printing company. We have an easy-cheesy FTP set up that drops the files right on our proxy server. We have a link to the FTP site from the home page of our web site. (Plus our domain name is...oddly enough...the one-word name of the company.) Even the most file transfer impaired have all sorts of options to get large files to us. We're even going to go to some sort of on-line proofing system. Bet that'll be a can of worms
Can people get us large file? Hell yeah! Do they? Huh? Hell no! "What's FTP?!"
The problem is usually on the designer/ad agency end. I say "usually" because the folks here are *paid* to be technically savvy. If they can't retrieve a file off of our FTP site or any other, they probably should look for another job.
The outside customers get scared if you tell them they have to type in a user name and password. Or if you tell them that apparently *their* firewall isn't letting them out, they drop back to a safe position like...
...email.
And even that can be problematic. Things that we think are simple - compressing files, especially fonts; naming conventions that make sense; resolution issues - become a Big Deal. On the other hand, that's what we're paid to do, troubleshoot, help, smile, be happy, offer fries with that...
I for one am glad AOL-Time Warner is eating their own pooch chow. Now I'll have even more ammo for my whining AOL customers. "I'm trying to send this, but YOUR email server says it's too big." MY email server can take it, baby!
"No, it's not important. It's a home. Basically all homes have people living in them..."
Well, Foobar104 *did* say it was a "silly example," but there are myriad reasons why who owns your home and how many people live there is public. Which it is, if you live in the US. And myriad reasons why that is important.
Those reasons range from knowing who is finacially and legally responsible for the property to building code violations to yeah, what happens if the place burns down.
If you're the tenant in the building, you probably would want this information made public. Especially if the building's owner isn't keeping the joint up to code and you're snuggling down with the rats at night.
If you're the guy that actually owns the property, it's more than a little unnerving when you discover that anyone with a web browser or the time can go to a web site or go down to the county courthouse and see how much you paid for it and when. And whether it passed municipal code. And how many people are *supposed* to be living in it. Not to mention what your neighbors paid for their homes. Or how much property tax you pay or if you didn't pay it last year and they're coming to get you.
Heh.
Oh by the way, yes, I have close contact with the real estate biz. And yes, the above information is available for owner-occupied private residences as well as investment property. At least in my county in the US.
Am I naked? I feel a distinctly non-private breeze.
"The truth is, we have no central scheduling app."
I guess we're really in the same boat. Except that my aforementioned Outlook "customization" *is* a scheduling app! It's a custom form published to a public folder.
Of course, the only people who can use it are folks who are either here at the plant or "dialed in" through PCAnywhere. Or the Macs running Virtual PC. Or you can get a stripped down version through Outlook Web Access. Or the Mac people can go over to a Windoze machine. (Which they hate, and I don't blame them being a former MacHead myself.)
So we're running your basic Exchange/Outlook fiasco that is, yes, the technical equivalent of the fatass notebook stuffed with post-its and ragged business cards. I tell the users that the best backup they have is the laser printer down the hall...
"Any email/messaging/whatever platform that requires a specific client must provide that client for both of those operating systems for it to be useful to our company."
So what are you using?
I ask because we have such a split as well. Though the Win machines probably outnumber the Macs 2 to 1. We all use Exchange/Outlook for mail, calendaring and contact management. Our biggest issue is some customization I've done in Outlook that simply doesn't show up on the Macs and it's probably more important to them than to most of the PC users.
But it works for us.
Shhh...don't tell anyone...but yeah, MS products and "it works" in the same post.
"She" and I don't live there anymore and I'm older and wiser - place of origin means less when you're 38 and the mom of 3 than when you're 19 and trying to get laid.
Even my husband, who *hated* Rolla when he went to school there, now admits there are certain merits to small town life.
And...when your dad's a PhD in nuclear Physics who insisted upon the highest in academic pursuits, it's kinda hard to think of yourself as a small town, truck drivin', gun totin', country girl. I didn't exactly fit in with my small-town peers.
Just noticed that the name of the university isn't spelled out in the text, not even in the "Related Links" sidebar.
And, by the way: GO UMR!
Good to see what is indeed a fine engineering university getting some press. Not that I'm biased...my spouse is an alum: BSEE, 1983. And I'm a "townie:" my dad taught Physics at UMR up until his retirement in 1981.
First, I'm on the list and it has reduced my telemarketing calls by at least 90%. It has been very quiet at my house.
Second, the law does not cover a business with which you have prior dealings. For example, if you have a credit card through Bubba's Bank, Bubba can call and offer you life insurance. And if you give out your phone number to retailers like...say...Sports Authority (which just rankles me,) then I think they're allowed to call you as well. After all, you gave out your number. (I always just say "it's unlisted" and have never had a pimply-faced 16 year old behind the counter question me.)
Nor does the law cover non-profit solicitations. Which are about as bad because you never know if "The U.S. Cancer Society" is real or if something like 98% of their donations go to administrative costs and the remaining pcket change goes to cancer research. To them I say, "send me something in the mail, please" and hang up.
Lastly, the state will call you back to check the number. The law does not cover business lines - so if you have a business line, even if your business is in your home and you were fool enough to tell SWB that it was a *business,* you're out of luck. And it doesn't cover cell phones because...well, see all the other posts on that.
"Money for living in a $500,000 house with three cars and a television in every room... "
Huh?
You mean King Kaufman (Salon senior writer) found a 6,000 square foot mansion in St. Louis' "Dog Town?" No way. At least I've never seen such a home in that neighborhood.
Who is it that's making all this money off of click-throughs and pop-ups that's living in these high-priced homes with all these amenities you speak of? The writers and editors of Salon? Oh...the advertising people...yeah...I'm familiar with them. We call 'em "customers." Saw one pull up in her fancy-schmancy Toyota the other day. The nerve...
Yes, well. If you must do your duty, you must. Don't read Salon. Don't click through the ads. You'll be a better person for it.
Let me get this straight. The most amusing thing you could come up with was to call a customer service line and ask about licensing open source products? Didja ask if their refrigerator was running? Did they say yes? Didja ask 'em to go catch it?
As my older brother used to say: cute, but not funny.
Next time someone wants to call Zones, or Softchoice or hell, even the BSA, give them a real world example to start the giggling. Tell them you have 100 users and you need licenses for 100 copies of Outlook, 15 copies of Excel, 50 copies of Word, 10 copies of Access, NO copies of Publisher, and 5 copies of Powerpoint. Now...is that all Office Standard, Office Pro or Office Seriously Diluted and Preinstalled on the Dell for the Home User?
How many points per copy, per package, per user, per workstation? How much per point? Now, now! No fair using the scientific calculator.
I'd love like all hell to comply to licensing...well, maybe not "love." I'd do it without much complaint. And somewhere in my desk drawer is a proposal from a reseller to get my company up to compliance. The bottom line was $20,000. And even in all that licensing mumbo-jumbo, there still was no guarantee that I didn't have a missed workstation, or a missed application that would instantly put me out of compliance.
*shrug* I'll get in compliance, as soon as I figure out exactly what that means and how much to hit up the boss for. In the meantime, 3 letters from the BSA, each with a different "truce number," 1 dated last year, and all 3 addressed to different people at this company. Am I to believe that these are NOT mere direct mail advertisements?
Not all tech stocks are traded on NASDAQ. In fact, NASDAQ is a fairly "new" exchange (yeah, I know, almost 30 years old) and I believe it struggled at first. SGI was founded only (really, "only") 10 years after NASDAQ was and went public...I don't know when. At any rate, they probably chose to go with NYSE for some very good reasons at the time. And I don't know the ins and outs of switching exchanges or even if it's possible, but that could be a real SEC paperwork nightmare.
A nightmare that SGI simply doesn't need.
Is the exchange going to affect the stock? I don't know, but I kind of doubt it. SGI's stock sucks of its own accord, not due to being traded on NYSE. There's a chance they could be pulled up by the index of the exchange or something if they were traded on NASDAQ, but I doubt it would contribute enough to make a huge difference.
"I certainly hope Gillian Anderson felt as foolish as she looked in the "cyberpunk" geek gear. "
Really.
And what happened to the character Scully's cynicism? She simply puts it aside to walk into a VR. No, more than that...she buys into what is happening.
The older X-Files were so appealing because in a sense, they had two endings. You could land on either the Mulder or the Scully side of the fence and be "right."
In this episode, Scully simply gives up explaining how someone could be killed by a virtual weapon and walks into the game, suited up like a fool, blasting away.
Slashdot Mirror
"Specifically, MS leaves out certain functionality for "strategic" reasons that essentially leave the Mac platform lacking in certain specific areas. Outlook, anyone? Java-enabled Web browsing anyone? There are other examples as well. What you end up with is well written software with what I call "strategic holes" in it."
I am so not being dense. Okay, maybe I am.
But what kind of business strategy would lead a company to intentionally leave holes in software? I'm no businessman and I'm no economist, but to me, that just doesn't make sense. Doesn't mean Microsoft doesn't intentionally leave holes in...say...Outlook (see my post above,) but at first glance and without more supporting information, it simply doesn't make good business sense.
For me and for my company, I'd love like all heck to see decent custom forms support in the Mac version of OL. And while I haven't heard any other specific complaints from the Mac users in our shop, I'm sure there are other holes they'd like filled.
Again, maybe I'm being dense or shortsighted, but filling this particular "hole" in Outlook would do little to nothing to our purchase of PCs and Microsoft products. In other words, we wouldn't (and really *couldn't*) switch the entire plant over to Macs just because the Macs could now utilize custom forms in OL. We have an entire data collection, order entry and billing system that's Windows-based, for one thing.
Why would a software company leave "strategic" holes in an application?
Oh, don't mind me. I'm just doing my part to get a release of Outlook for OSX that'll render the custom forms I've created. It's my mantra. It's my prayer. Perhaps someone at MacBU is listening...
Custom forms, custom forms, custom forms...
Definitely reaching.
A plumber is not a low-skilled worker. At least not where I come from. They're highly skilled, actually and yes, well paid. Plus, you seem to be confusing "self-employed" with "unemployed."
The only thing technology gave people such as plumbers (okay, I'm gonna beat your bad analogy to death, sorry) is an inexpensive method of communicating. And before cell phones, they had radio dispatch or a voice mail system. And before that, you had to wait until the guy got all his messages at the end of the day, I suppose. But this didn't make him more employable or more skilled as a plumber. It made him more productive. It was a communication tool, not a plumbing training course.
But that's really why your analogy is bad. You grabbed a group of skilled workers and gave them cell phones. Now try this, grab a group of *truly* *unskilled* workers - perhaps people who don't have the education to read their native language and give them a cell phone or a computer. What then? How does even an inexpensive computer help someone who can't read? It can't. Not in a vacuum. That truly unskilled person will need help with *reading.* That's a skill that can't be taught just by plunking down the computer on a table or handing that person a cell phone.
Technology does not magically impart skills upon the unskilled or education upon the uneducated.
'bout time we had what fighter pilots have...
"Better watch with the Christian insults, they can be surprisingly vicious."
Which? The Christians or the insults?
The Missouri no call list is fantastic. I've extolled its virtues to many of my friends and neighbors. Since both of my land lines (a personal line and a fax line that SWBT doesn't know is a business line...heheh...) are on the attorney general's list, I've recieved very few telemarketing calls. And the ones I've received were probably from companies that are exempt - credit card companies, for example.
Plus, Missouri prosecutes violators. Gotta love that.
However, as far as I know, the Missouri law does not cover cell phones. In fact, we tried to put our cell on the list, the no-call folks called back and said that since it was a cell, it couldn't be on the list. But - as other posters have pointed out - I believe that in my area cell phones are automatically off of call lists anyway. And in the case of my specific area, the *area* *code* may be the same as land lines, but the *exchange* (that second set of 3 numbers) is different for cells. Thus marking cell numbers and putting them out of bounds for telemarketers.
We've not recieved one solitary telemarketing call on our cell.
But as always, milage varies.
Mebbe he's got one of them thar newfangled CMYK monitors that majickly uses additive color on a subtractive color device.
Or something.
Back to work. Gotta make this tint build match reflex.
"huh? You can't rewind it? Why not?" Yes, that actually happened to someone I know.
Happens to me every day. Three kids, all under age 6. All used to video or dvd for their movies. Sometimes we watch a movie "on TV." And that's when it gets confusing for them. They hate, hate, hate commercial content and don't understand why the commercials are there in the first place and why we can't at least FF through them.
"I think it's safe to say that having more money than you need makes it easier to be less cautious in your spending."
This does make sense to me.
Back in BC* I made less money, but lived well below my means. While I owned my own house, the mortgage payment was ridiculously low, car payment same, nothing to do but play and buy my spouse expensive gifts. Spouse bought same.
We did save. We're not complete...erm...idiots. But we had more money, fewer obligations, and therefore, we spent some of it like fools.
I don't know that this kind of spending is the mark of the young, childless and well-off. I work with people over age 45 with older children who still live paycheck to paycheck because of their SUVs and DVD collections. Some folks never learn.
You've at least seen the light. Keep digging yourself out. Then you'll have the best of all worlds, money now, money later, early retirement.
sweeeeet...early...retirement...ughghgh...
*BC - Before Children
Oh, I see...you make it a point to buy flour and sugar in single-color packages and then you bake your own cookies. You live a print-free life. You're a hermit. You somehow manage to completely avoid the 4th largest contributor to the US GNP.
For what it's worth, the phrase that can strike fear in any prepress dept's heart is: "...it's just a simple one-color job..."
(Lately our black-only cheap-and-cheezy stuff has been going to a Canon high-speed toner on paper printer that probably cost more than any of us will make before retirement.)
"Why not just let those users that have a need to send large files to each other do it with email."
Actually, that's what I do. We have a prepress-specific email address set up that our customers use for emailing files to us. WE have no attachment restrictions or limits. It's the limitations that customers may have that give us fits.
Well, I do have storage limits for individual users' email accounts, here. But not for the prepress account in particular.
If I were to be totally honest, the email solution works well. What I don't "get" is why FTP is seemingly so difficult for our customers to grasp. I read the posts about scripting the FTP uploads, etc. But I don't think it should be necessary to further simplify something that is already very simple. I've used command-line, CuteFTP and Fetch and they're just not that difficult to use. And I ain't all that bright.
"Maintaining seperate accounts on the ftp server for their customers is possible, but really not that practical. Email is a better solution."
Now here's a situation that I thankfully don't have to deal with. So far, we haven't had customers request any more privacy than our one general non-anonymous user logon (all of our customers use the same username and pass.) They can see each other's files when they're using our FTP site. (We get more sensitive jobs on CD or other media.)
But I can see where this could be an issue in the future for us and how a magazine would definitely want separate user accounts. We're also going to a "soft" on-line proofing system that will require individual user logons.
One company that has a printing-specific solution for this is Xinet with their WebNative application (or suite of applications.) It's literally been years since I read/heard/had a clue about Xinet's offerings, but I will probably have to get up to speed here very soon.
"Do these people not have FTP? Is their IT department asleep at the wheel?"
Don't blame the IT people for this. An FTP site that is easily accessible by internal prepress production and the outside designer isn't a guarantee that anyone will have a clue how to use it.
I'm the "IT guy" (heh...) at a mid-sized commercial printing company. We have an easy-cheesy FTP set up that drops the files right on our proxy server. We have a link to the FTP site from the home page of our web site. (Plus our domain name is...oddly enough...the one-word name of the company.) Even the most file transfer impaired have all sorts of options to get large files to us. We're even going to go to some sort of on-line proofing system. Bet that'll be a can of worms
Can people get us large file? Hell yeah! Do they? Huh? Hell no! "What's FTP?!"
The problem is usually on the designer/ad agency end. I say "usually" because the folks here are *paid* to be technically savvy. If they can't retrieve a file off of our FTP site or any other, they probably should look for another job.
The outside customers get scared if you tell them they have to type in a user name and password. Or if you tell them that apparently *their* firewall isn't letting them out, they drop back to a safe position like...
...email.
And even that can be problematic. Things that we think are simple - compressing files, especially fonts; naming conventions that make sense; resolution issues - become a Big Deal. On the other hand, that's what we're paid to do, troubleshoot, help, smile, be happy, offer fries with that...
I for one am glad AOL-Time Warner is eating their own pooch chow. Now I'll have even more ammo for my whining AOL customers. "I'm trying to send this, but YOUR email server says it's too big." MY email server can take it, baby!
"No, it's not important. It's a home. Basically all homes have people living in them..."
Well, Foobar104 *did* say it was a "silly example," but there are myriad reasons why who owns your home and how many people live there is public. Which it is, if you live in the US. And myriad reasons why that is important.
Those reasons range from knowing who is finacially and legally responsible for the property to building code violations to yeah, what happens if the place burns down.
If you're the tenant in the building, you probably would want this information made public. Especially if the building's owner isn't keeping the joint up to code and you're snuggling down with the rats at night.
If you're the guy that actually owns the property, it's more than a little unnerving when you discover that anyone with a web browser or the time can go to a web site or go down to the county courthouse and see how much you paid for it and when. And whether it passed municipal code. And how many people are *supposed* to be living in it. Not to mention what your neighbors paid for their homes. Or how much property tax you pay or if you didn't pay it last year and they're coming to get you.
Heh.
Oh by the way, yes, I have close contact with the real estate biz. And yes, the above information is available for owner-occupied private residences as well as investment property. At least in my county in the US.
Am I naked? I feel a distinctly non-private breeze.
Or the exchange:
"Are you frightened?"
"Yes."
"Not nearly frightened enough."
"The truth is, we have no central scheduling app."
I guess we're really in the same boat. Except that my aforementioned Outlook "customization" *is* a scheduling app! It's a custom form published to a public folder.
Of course, the only people who can use it are folks who are either here at the plant or "dialed in" through PCAnywhere. Or the Macs running Virtual PC. Or you can get a stripped down version through Outlook Web Access. Or the Mac people can go over to a Windoze machine. (Which they hate, and I don't blame them being a former MacHead myself.)
So we're running your basic Exchange/Outlook fiasco that is, yes, the technical equivalent of the fatass notebook stuffed with post-its and ragged business cards. I tell the users that the best backup they have is the laser printer down the hall...
So. You know. I feel your pain.
"Any email/messaging/whatever platform that requires a specific client must provide that client for both of those operating systems for it to be useful to our company."
So what are you using?
I ask because we have such a split as well. Though the Win machines probably outnumber the Macs 2 to 1. We all use Exchange/Outlook for mail, calendaring and contact management. Our biggest issue is some customization I've done in Outlook that simply doesn't show up on the Macs and it's probably more important to them than to most of the PC users.
But it works for us.
Shhh...don't tell anyone...but yeah, MS products and "it works" in the same post.
"She" and I don't live there anymore and I'm older and wiser - place of origin means less when you're 38 and the mom of 3 than when you're 19 and trying to get laid.
Even my husband, who *hated* Rolla when he went to school there, now admits there are certain merits to small town life.
And...when your dad's a PhD in nuclear Physics who insisted upon the highest in academic pursuits, it's kinda hard to think of yourself as a small town, truck drivin', gun totin', country girl. I didn't exactly fit in with my small-town peers.
Yee-haw.
Hmm...kinda like the story I saw on 9/11 that talked about the Pentagon's "octagonal" shape.
Just noticed that the name of the university isn't spelled out in the text, not even in the "Related Links" sidebar.
And, by the way: GO UMR!
Good to see what is indeed a fine engineering university getting some press. Not that I'm biased...my spouse is an alum: BSEE, 1983. And I'm a "townie:" my dad taught Physics at UMR up until his retirement in 1981.
Good luck!
Coupla things about the Missouri no-call law.
First, I'm on the list and it has reduced my telemarketing calls by at least 90%. It has been very quiet at my house.
Second, the law does not cover a business with which you have prior dealings. For example, if you have a credit card through Bubba's Bank, Bubba can call and offer you life insurance. And if you give out your phone number to retailers like...say...Sports Authority (which just rankles me,) then I think they're allowed to call you as well. After all, you gave out your number. (I always just say "it's unlisted" and have never had a pimply-faced 16 year old behind the counter question me.)
Nor does the law cover non-profit solicitations. Which are about as bad because you never know if "The U.S. Cancer Society" is real or if something like 98% of their donations go to administrative costs and the remaining pcket change goes to cancer research. To them I say, "send me something in the mail, please" and hang up.
Lastly, the state will call you back to check the number. The law does not cover business lines - so if you have a business line, even if your business is in your home and you were fool enough to tell SWB that it was a *business,* you're out of luck. And it doesn't cover cell phones because...well, see all the other posts on that.
The MO no call kicks butt.
Rolla, huh...my daddy used to teach there...
"Money for living in a $500,000 house with three cars and a television in every room... "
Huh?
You mean King Kaufman (Salon senior writer) found a 6,000 square foot mansion in St. Louis' "Dog Town?" No way. At least I've never seen such a home in that neighborhood.
Who is it that's making all this money off of click-throughs and pop-ups that's living in these high-priced homes with all these amenities you speak of? The writers and editors of Salon? Oh...the advertising people...yeah...I'm familiar with them. We call 'em "customers." Saw one pull up in her fancy-schmancy Toyota the other day. The nerve...
Yes, well. If you must do your duty, you must. Don't read Salon. Don't click through the ads. You'll be a better person for it.
Let me get this straight. The most amusing thing you could come up with was to call a customer service line and ask about licensing open source products? Didja ask if their refrigerator was running? Did they say yes? Didja ask 'em to go catch it?
As my older brother used to say: cute, but not funny.
Next time someone wants to call Zones, or Softchoice or hell, even the BSA, give them a real world example to start the giggling. Tell them you have 100 users and you need licenses for 100 copies of Outlook, 15 copies of Excel, 50 copies of Word, 10 copies of Access, NO copies of Publisher, and 5 copies of Powerpoint. Now...is that all Office Standard, Office Pro or Office Seriously Diluted and Preinstalled on the Dell for the Home User?
How many points per copy, per package, per user, per workstation? How much per point? Now, now! No fair using the scientific calculator.
I'd love like all hell to comply to licensing...well, maybe not "love." I'd do it without much complaint. And somewhere in my desk drawer is a proposal from a reseller to get my company up to compliance. The bottom line was $20,000. And even in all that licensing mumbo-jumbo, there still was no guarantee that I didn't have a missed workstation, or a missed application that would instantly put me out of compliance.
*shrug* I'll get in compliance, as soon as I figure out exactly what that means and how much to hit up the boss for. In the meantime, 3 letters from the BSA, each with a different "truce number," 1 dated last year, and all 3 addressed to different people at this company. Am I to believe that these are NOT mere direct mail advertisements?
"Apple had to take out all the Easter eggs in all their mac apps."
I'm curious. What Apple applications are you talking about? The OS?
Adobe, on the other hand, has easter egg upon easter egg crediting just about everyone and their pets.
Not all tech stocks are traded on NASDAQ. In fact, NASDAQ is a fairly "new" exchange (yeah, I know, almost 30 years old) and I believe it struggled at first. SGI was founded only (really, "only") 10 years after NASDAQ was and went public...I don't know when. At any rate, they probably chose to go with NYSE for some very good reasons at the time. And I don't know the ins and outs of switching exchanges or even if it's possible, but that could be a real SEC paperwork nightmare.
A nightmare that SGI simply doesn't need.
Is the exchange going to affect the stock? I don't know, but I kind of doubt it. SGI's stock sucks of its own accord, not due to being traded on NYSE. There's a chance they could be pulled up by the index of the exchange or something if they were traded on NASDAQ, but I doubt it would contribute enough to make a huge difference.
"I certainly hope Gillian Anderson felt as foolish as she looked in the "cyberpunk" geek gear. "
Really.
And what happened to the character Scully's cynicism? She simply puts it aside to walk into a VR. No, more than that...she buys into what is happening.
The older X-Files were so appealing because in a sense, they had two endings. You could land on either the Mulder or the Scully side of the fence and be "right."
In this episode, Scully simply gives up explaining how someone could be killed by a virtual weapon and walks into the game, suited up like a fool, blasting away.
She sold out. Disappointing.