why promise to support a dead release for 5 years 6 months after the upgrade is released? in 2 years nobody will care about 3.5 and simply tell you to upgrade because those bugs are fixed.. Canonical doesn't want to do that by themselves. 4.0 isn't ready for betting your company on just yet, so the solution was to put both in the 8.04 under standard support, then commit to 4.0 under 8.10 forward... that seems the best course, had KDE gotten their stuff out in October so it could be in 7.10, they would have made the 8.04 release.. it's not like the plans for Ubuntu's support schedule are secret or unpredictable.
or rather KED is "done when it's done" and Ubuntu needs a full cycle of completion before they'll claim LTS status for KED 4. In this case KDE 4 will only have been released 3 months before Canonical has to make a decision on wether to be tied to that release for 5 years. Ubuntu is much smaller than Red Hat or Suse and they don't want to play the games of supporting backports and cross-grades like done with the various boxed versions of Suse or RHEL. They waited until an odd time to release that's on nobody else's schedule.. The more politically correct thing might be to delay the LTS release in general then fewer feelings would be hurt.
The situation is not that KDE 4 is "not supported" but the combo in 8.04 will include BOTH 3.5 and 4.0! but only for the standard 18 months. Then the 8.10 will be fully supported for 4.0 only and probably LTS as well. It's a matter of Canonical not wanting to be tied up supporting bleeding edge releases just yet. Remember, Red Hat and Suse don't SUPPORT the free versions for customers, only the carefully limited pay-for versions and if you go "off the reservation" with upstream updates, they tell you to reinstall the base just like other commercial OS vendors do. Part of the Ubuntu experience is that there is no artificial divide between the "open source" and the "tweaked" versions.. it's their stated interest to work CLOSER to the upstream source, not wall their stuff off to versions they have to babysit for 5 years like RH or Suse has.
Walmart's problem is that "efficient" is not "unique". really look at the shelves and variety is gone.. they sell just 2 brands of most items, novelty items (toys, specific #2 name brands, back catalog of any type of media, etc) are the most generic version or scarce. They're good for staples (vegies, cereal, milk, bread), but poor for unique interesting things... the ones you get to mark up a bunch.. that's why Target is eating their lunch selling everything Walmart CAN'T because Walmart has beat up too many people and demands too much in their favor to be "efficient".
I think it was "me-too" to copy Apple with iTunes... One of the things NBC cited was Walmart holding their DVD distribution channel "hostage" if the studios didn't do something about Apple raining on their in store sales parade of music and DVD sales. Walmart's business is selling commodity stuff, cheap. DVDs fit the bill perfectly as there is no variation (Spiderman 3 is the same anywhere) and Walmart has a better channel than a zillion little stores to control for the studios. Everybody wants to be part of Walmart's success.. big media, Microsoft, etc... it lets them get whatever they want to try out.
You are using the system EXACTLY what it's for... carry on!
If your in the business of getting domain names for people this is wrecking the party... Sort of like a Walmart manager buying up all the Wiis so he can ebay them and returning them to his store if nobody buys them before his credit card bill comes due. It's not illegal, but it's an ethical conflict if interest.
These guys are using insider contacts to buy up domains based on what people search for.. want to "just look"? Too bad, they'll take it and put the name on ebay because you didn't buy it right then. About the only real solution is to always have funds available "right now" so you can play the game too and buy up whatever may fancy you... think "buy and return" rather than "take what you need".
the goal would be to keep track of the random names you enter and get thousands of people to point to them for the few days they are "tasting" so they keep it thinking it's a big winner.... then stick them with the pay. Find out who the registrars are giving back money after 30 days and rat them out.
sure, but lets stop Microsoft from buying companies and it's illegal anti-competitive practices first!!! Nobody's in a hurry, why should Microsoft be "protected" when clearly they argued nobody should be protected from Microsoft!
when it mattered MS ran on Power PC and CE runs on a bunch of stuff.
Google will keep alternate browsers and web standards around to fuel "competition" it can control, like MS plays AMD vs Intel just to keep Intel from getting cocky.
but this is money the STUDIOS have to pay to keep their precious "IP"... there's nobody they can cheat out of paying, no back room deals.. they pay or lose the information.
I do agree they are not contacting the right people. I'd bet GM or Ford keep this much info for SOX/ISO/EPA/engineering/QA/ect purposes on a monthly basis... studio exec are really stupid when it comes to technology.
first, they are not doing a good job of "husbanding" their film archive.. if Lucas lost the original Star Wars masters to laziness, then a good share of the 20th century is ruined at this point.
Second, if the extra digital film wasn't used in the release, and wasn't added to extras, the pitch it and move on. If you didn't make money from it then... Your not going to. Preserve the movie, important cut scenes, and perhaps enlightening retakes, alternate scenes, etc... but the vast majority of the stuff is crap.. you didn't sell it the first time around, don't pay to keep it.
remember that quote from Universal's exec... they're new to tech stuff. they don't have "experts" yet!
That would sum this up nicely too. They are probably getting raped by some data warehouse using 5 year old backup tech versus calling up Amazon or Google and getting it done right.
that would be the point in a nutshell WHY digital storage is "expensive". Execs expect cheap storage for film because they've got away with it for years.. never mind the rooms of movies ruined by water leaks, neglect, heat, rats, etc. The original Star Wars was subject to their "cheap" practices and the film master was DESTROYED.. beyond usefulness. Lucas had to recreate parts from stock and CGI because the master was unusable.
Digital storage requires somebody maintain the drives, somebody test them, not just stick it in a dark closet and forget.
As a side note they could just upload their movies to Pirate Bay and thousands of people would willingly back them up for free!!!
That sounds about 3/4 like my office. The missing quarter are the things I'd like to see.. no tables against walls, and desks facing the room entry, not the corners (common in cube setup).
You are correct about Office space separate from server space.. in fact it was a SOX issue that hardware had to be in a locked limited access room so that janitors couldn't access the room and mess stuff up. Like you said, you have to have a trash pick up designated OUTSIDE the server room.
It would be good to have the office portion facing the other offices and accessible to everybody. It should be too close, or like you said, sectioned off, but IT should be accessible it makes people have a better opinion of you. As long as it's set off enough you can have quite to work when you need to solve tough problems or conference on the phone.
IT people will ask for exactly what they NEED.. management will be too busy building and cut it in half figuring IT is asking for what they WANT. In reality management should KNOW what you need and ask for your input... tell the electrical designer how many watts, the HVAC guy how many tons, the floor guy... etc, be part of the building TEAM. Being thrown the whole thing in this manner shows they don't really think your important enough to the company.. i.e. he's already talking sharing the room with servers which is very tacky, non-productive, anti-social, and possibly and OSHA violation.
you are correct, "always ready" technology is using a huge amount of power. Better connected devices would be nice, but I'd like to see more standard power sources that can be more efficient as well as a move toward FEWER electronic devices in my house.. it's too small and crowded already.
at the time of Tesla patents had to WORK to be accepted.. most of his stuff was just ideas or prototypes that never did quite what the drawings said. Until about the 1970's that stuff wasn't patentable. In that environment, it was guys like Edison that used brute force that were rewarded because they had "something" to actually patent so they "won".
That's why Bell vs Gray was such a race... you couldn't just publish a vague drawing then slap down competition like the companies do now. They had to not just get to the PTO, but have verified signatures that the device worked with them.
I though other types of european countries held "artistic" copyrights for "historical" reasons... aren't most of the works of Bach, DiVincci, Michangelo.. etc, etc, under "historical" copyright? Even if you go visit those 300+ year old items, they still won't let you take pictures, even on the one in public spaces. This is isn't new, just over the top.
He was at the fucking store!!! Why can't the APPLE STORE be just as reasonable? as the mail order repair. It's a fucking hard drive! He sounded willing to pay "extra", but they didn't even OFFER that option to his complaint!!!
There's a bunch of stuff he COULD have done differently, but he'd have preferred APPLE to do their JOB and make it right for HIM on the first try, not after he carefully negotiates with them 1 hour over a 5 minute repair. He didn't ask for it back up front because he was still in the store and expected them to act ETHICALLY and inform him of his choice as a matter of quality service he valued enough to pay extra for!!!
exactly, Apple is probably swapping out a "used, serviceable" (not guaranteed new!) part for the cost of a new one, because the "customer" warranty ran out... then claiming warranty costs against manufacturer anyway. That's probably why the PHB in charge was told to be such an ass and didn't simply correct the paperwork as Apple has an option to return parts if requested.
other posters have said Apple does have a policy to return parts upon request... the guy hadn't left the store (or finished paying), the transaction wasn't "complete" he was "requesting"!!! The whole thing could have been moot if the PHB in charge had simply re-printed the receipt per the customer's wishes and produced the drive.
It's the fact that it was so "final"... that pissed the guy off. Pointing to the fine print for an option they didn't notify him up front for. Like many other posters have said, auto shops did this for years until the law make them put a separate box on the receipt you must initial so the "details" don't get "forgot" and you the customer always are informed of your choices. The behavior of the PHB implies that they know there is the option, but management wants them to "hide" the facts from the customer... that's FRAUD.
he paid for non-warranty repair... another caveat is that he SHOULD have paid for NEW parts, not "used serviceable" for the price. Either way it was not a "warranty" repair and he should have gotten the parts back. In fact other posters have said Apple even has an option to return user parts, the PHB just refused to offer it or we wouldn't be talking about this!
the point is that like auto parts, return of defective parts should be systematic... not some fine print "catch" you have to ask special for. Auto repair centers did this for years, replacing OEM part with knock-offs so they could sell "originals" at higher prices, it was so bad we made laws about customers always getting their defective parts back.. in a worst case situation an auto owner could take the "bad" part to a friend to have a "second opinion" and due to the law, the mechanic has "done no wrong" because the customer has the original part, they only "stole" the value of labor.
You shouldn't have to be a computer tech to get fair computer repair, just like not everybody is car mechanics... that is this guys point! He ASKED for the drive to be returned and they refused! THAT is the point. He wasn't willing to "take their word for it".. his point was that they refused "because it's always that way".. that's a piss-poor answer, just like auto parts, customers should always get the option of returned parts as a matter of good business ethics.
I think the issue was more customer service than an Apple problem. The guy COULD have replaced the part on his own, he knew he was being ripped off price but it was an "apple certified" replacement, so they couldn't blame him later for a non-apple part like support likes to do. They already had the laptop on the bench for testing, they had the tools and he could walk out with a fixed laptop right now, so the extra $$$ was worth it.
He is at fault for probably not paying careful attention to the fine print, but it's management's fault for not getting the customer the CORRECT fine print after he indicated he wasn't satisfied.. They could have obtained the Correct contract for $20 more dollars and he'd have been all set. the deal's not done until the customer walks out the door!
Slashdot Mirror
why promise to support a dead release for 5 years 6 months after the upgrade is released? in 2 years nobody will care about 3.5 and simply tell you to upgrade because those bugs are fixed.. Canonical doesn't want to do that by themselves. 4.0 isn't ready for betting your company on just yet, so the solution was to put both in the 8.04 under standard support, then commit to 4.0 under 8.10 forward... that seems the best course, had KDE gotten their stuff out in October so it could be in 7.10, they would have made the 8.04 release.. it's not like the plans for Ubuntu's support schedule are secret or unpredictable.
or rather KED is "done when it's done" and Ubuntu needs a full cycle of completion before they'll claim LTS status for KED 4. In this case KDE 4 will only have been released 3 months before Canonical has to make a decision on wether to be tied to that release for 5 years. Ubuntu is much smaller than Red Hat or Suse and they don't want to play the games of supporting backports and cross-grades like done with the various boxed versions of Suse or RHEL. They waited until an odd time to release that's on nobody else's schedule.. The more politically correct thing might be to delay the LTS release in general then fewer feelings would be hurt.
The situation is not that KDE 4 is "not supported" but the combo in 8.04 will include BOTH 3.5 and 4.0! but only for the standard 18 months. Then the 8.10 will be fully supported for 4.0 only and probably LTS as well. It's a matter of Canonical not wanting to be tied up supporting bleeding edge releases just yet. Remember, Red Hat and Suse don't SUPPORT the free versions for customers, only the carefully limited pay-for versions and if you go "off the reservation" with upstream updates, they tell you to reinstall the base just like other commercial OS vendors do. Part of the Ubuntu experience is that there is no artificial divide between the "open source" and the "tweaked" versions.. it's their stated interest to work CLOSER to the upstream source, not wall their stuff off to versions they have to babysit for 5 years like RH or Suse has.
Walmart's problem is that "efficient" is not "unique". really look at the shelves and variety is gone.. they sell just 2 brands of most items, novelty items (toys, specific #2 name brands, back catalog of any type of media, etc) are the most generic version or scarce. They're good for staples (vegies, cereal, milk, bread), but poor for unique interesting things... the ones you get to mark up a bunch.. that's why Target is eating their lunch selling everything Walmart CAN'T because Walmart has beat up too many people and demands too much in their favor to be "efficient".
I think it was "me-too" to copy Apple with iTunes... One of the things NBC cited was Walmart holding their DVD distribution channel "hostage" if the studios didn't do something about Apple raining on their in store sales parade of music and DVD sales. Walmart's business is selling commodity stuff, cheap. DVDs fit the bill perfectly as there is no variation (Spiderman 3 is the same anywhere) and Walmart has a better channel than a zillion little stores to control for the studios. Everybody wants to be part of Walmart's success.. big media, Microsoft, etc... it lets them get whatever they want to try out.
You are using the system EXACTLY what it's for... carry on!
... think "buy and return" rather than "take what you need".
If your in the business of getting domain names for people this is wrecking the party... Sort of like a Walmart manager buying up all the Wiis so he can ebay them and returning them to his store if nobody buys them before his credit card bill comes due. It's not illegal, but it's an ethical conflict if interest.
These guys are using insider contacts to buy up domains based on what people search for.. want to "just look"? Too bad, they'll take it and put the name on ebay because you didn't buy it right then. About the only real solution is to always have funds available "right now" so you can play the game too and buy up whatever may fancy you
the goal would be to keep track of the random names you enter and get thousands of people to point to them for the few days they are "tasting" so they keep it thinking it's a big winner.... then stick them with the pay. Find out who the registrars are giving back money after 30 days and rat them out.
other news.. iPhone doesn't run Blackberry or Windows mobile apps either.. the humanity!!!
sure, but lets stop Microsoft from buying companies and it's illegal anti-competitive practices first!!! Nobody's in a hurry, why should Microsoft be "protected" when clearly they argued nobody should be protected from Microsoft!
when it mattered MS ran on Power PC and CE runs on a bunch of stuff.
Google will keep alternate browsers and web standards around to fuel "competition" it can control, like MS plays AMD vs Intel just to keep Intel from getting cocky.
it's not like they'd use their monopoly on OSes... and web browser to pump up the hits per day for MSN or anything? never.
but this is money the STUDIOS have to pay to keep their precious "IP"... there's nobody they can cheat out of paying, no back room deals.. they pay or lose the information.
I do agree they are not contacting the right people. I'd bet GM or Ford keep this much info for SOX/ISO/EPA/engineering/QA/ect purposes on a monthly basis... studio exec are really stupid when it comes to technology.
first, they are not doing a good job of "husbanding" their film archive.. if Lucas lost the original Star Wars masters to laziness, then a good share of the 20th century is ruined at this point.
Second, if the extra digital film wasn't used in the release, and wasn't added to extras, the pitch it and move on. If you didn't make money from it then... Your not going to. Preserve the movie, important cut scenes, and perhaps enlightening retakes, alternate scenes, etc... but the vast majority of the stuff is crap.. you didn't sell it the first time around, don't pay to keep it.
remember that quote from Universal's exec... they're new to tech stuff. they don't have "experts" yet!
That would sum this up nicely too. They are probably getting raped by some data warehouse using 5 year old backup tech versus calling up Amazon or Google and getting it done right.
that would be the point in a nutshell WHY digital storage is "expensive". Execs expect cheap storage for film because they've got away with it for years.. never mind the rooms of movies ruined by water leaks, neglect, heat, rats, etc. The original Star Wars was subject to their "cheap" practices and the film master was DESTROYED.. beyond usefulness. Lucas had to recreate parts from stock and CGI because the master was unusable.
Digital storage requires somebody maintain the drives, somebody test them, not just stick it in a dark closet and forget.
As a side note they could just upload their movies to Pirate Bay and thousands of people would willingly back them up for free!!!
That sounds about 3/4 like my office. The missing quarter are the things I'd like to see.. no tables against walls, and desks facing the room entry, not the corners (common in cube setup).
You are correct about Office space separate from server space.. in fact it was a SOX issue that hardware had to be in a locked limited access room so that janitors couldn't access the room and mess stuff up. Like you said, you have to have a trash pick up designated OUTSIDE the server room.
It would be good to have the office portion facing the other offices and accessible to everybody. It should be too close, or like you said, sectioned off, but IT should be accessible it makes people have a better opinion of you. As long as it's set off enough you can have quite to work when you need to solve tough problems or conference on the phone.
IT people will ask for exactly what they NEED.. management will be too busy building and cut it in half figuring IT is asking for what they WANT. In reality management should KNOW what you need and ask for your input... tell the electrical designer how many watts, the HVAC guy how many tons, the floor guy ... etc, be part of the building TEAM. Being thrown the whole thing in this manner shows they don't really think your important enough to the company.. i.e. he's already talking sharing the room with servers which is very tacky, non-productive, anti-social, and possibly and OSHA violation.
you are correct, "always ready" technology is using a huge amount of power. Better connected devices would be nice, but I'd like to see more standard power sources that can be more efficient as well as a move toward FEWER electronic devices in my house.. it's too small and crowded already.
at the time of Tesla patents had to WORK to be accepted.. most of his stuff was just ideas or prototypes that never did quite what the drawings said. Until about the 1970's that stuff wasn't patentable. In that environment, it was guys like Edison that used brute force that were rewarded because they had "something" to actually patent so they "won".
That's why Bell vs Gray was such a race... you couldn't just publish a vague drawing then slap down competition like the companies do now. They had to not just get to the PTO, but have verified signatures that the device worked with them.
I though other types of european countries held "artistic" copyrights for "historical" reasons... aren't most of the works of Bach, DiVincci, Michangelo.. etc, etc, under "historical" copyright? Even if you go visit those 300+ year old items, they still won't let you take pictures, even on the one in public spaces. This is isn't new, just over the top.
He was at the fucking store!!! Why can't the APPLE STORE be just as reasonable? as the mail order repair. It's a fucking hard drive! He sounded willing to pay "extra", but they didn't even OFFER that option to his complaint!!!
There's a bunch of stuff he COULD have done differently, but he'd have preferred APPLE to do their JOB and make it right for HIM on the first try, not after he carefully negotiates with them 1 hour over a 5 minute repair. He didn't ask for it back up front because he was still in the store and expected them to act ETHICALLY and inform him of his choice as a matter of quality service he valued enough to pay extra for!!!
exactly, Apple is probably swapping out a "used, serviceable" (not guaranteed new!) part for the cost of a new one, because the "customer" warranty ran out... then claiming warranty costs against manufacturer anyway. That's probably why the PHB in charge was told to be such an ass and didn't simply correct the paperwork as Apple has an option to return parts if requested.
other posters have said Apple does have a policy to return parts upon request... the guy hadn't left the store (or finished paying), the transaction wasn't "complete" he was "requesting"!!! The whole thing could have been moot if the PHB in charge had simply re-printed the receipt per the customer's wishes and produced the drive.
... that's FRAUD.
It's the fact that it was so "final"... that pissed the guy off. Pointing to the fine print for an option they didn't notify him up front for. Like many other posters have said, auto shops did this for years until the law make them put a separate box on the receipt you must initial so the "details" don't get "forgot" and you the customer always are informed of your choices. The behavior of the PHB implies that they know there is the option, but management wants them to "hide" the facts from the customer
he paid for non-warranty repair... another caveat is that he SHOULD have paid for NEW parts, not "used serviceable" for the price. Either way it was not a "warranty" repair and he should have gotten the parts back. In fact other posters have said Apple even has an option to return user parts, the PHB just refused to offer it or we wouldn't be talking about this!
the point is that like auto parts, return of defective parts should be systematic... not some fine print "catch" you have to ask special for. Auto repair centers did this for years, replacing OEM part with knock-offs so they could sell "originals" at higher prices, it was so bad we made laws about customers always getting their defective parts back.. in a worst case situation an auto owner could take the "bad" part to a friend to have a "second opinion" and due to the law, the mechanic has "done no wrong" because the customer has the original part, they only "stole" the value of labor.
You shouldn't have to be a computer tech to get fair computer repair, just like not everybody is car mechanics... that is this guys point! He ASKED for the drive to be returned and they refused! THAT is the point. He wasn't willing to "take their word for it".. his point was that they refused "because it's always that way".. that's a piss-poor answer, just like auto parts, customers should always get the option of returned parts as a matter of good business ethics.
I think the issue was more customer service than an Apple problem. The guy COULD have replaced the part on his own, he knew he was being ripped off price but it was an "apple certified" replacement, so they couldn't blame him later for a non-apple part like support likes to do. They already had the laptop on the bench for testing, they had the tools and he could walk out with a fixed laptop right now, so the extra $$$ was worth it.
He is at fault for probably not paying careful attention to the fine print, but it's management's fault for not getting the customer the CORRECT fine print after he indicated he wasn't satisfied.. They could have obtained the Correct contract for $20 more dollars and he'd have been all set. the deal's not done until the customer walks out the door!