It was my belief that if you offered your two weeks, and are willing and able to work for those two weeks, they are required to either keep you for the two weeks, pay you for the two weeks and ask you to stay home, or fire/lay you off. If they decided not to pay you and send you home, you could file for unemployment. So, they are pretty much required to give you the money.
Past that, you obviously didn't do anything wrong here, and the same has happened to myself and probably most other IT people. It's quite silly, really. When you're hired, they know nothing about you and yet after only a short few days (usually) they have to give you the proper access to perform your duties. No problem there. Yet after a year or more working with you, if you say you're leaving they immediately don't trust you. It doesn't make sense, but some managers are just stupid like that. Some even feel as though you've betrayed them by advancing your career, or it's a hit to their egos or something.
Some companies take advantage of the two weeks, some rush you out the door without letting you say goodbye.
Yea, isn't it funny how many of these (loud, alarmist) people are taking up the "victim" role these days? I guess they don't realize that most programming jobs are for internal company apps, not for-sale apps, and it doesn't matter if you use OSS or not - you still get paid. Except, with OSS, you feel a little better about yourself in the morning =)
Plus, most big OSS programming positions appear to be fully paid for gigs from lots of big companies. You could write Microsoft software, and work for.. Microsoft. Or you could write OSS software, and work for just about anyone else. As far as core apps and OS goes, at least.
It seems to prove my overall feeling that although programmers might be very good at writing code, they don't always have any common sense.
It probably won't happen anyways. With each Windows release, they claim "Less reboots!" and in reality, there's no less.
Who knows, maybe with a "Reboot Framework.NET ASP 1.2.3.4 Live 2006" or whatever the hell they called it, we might actually see less reboots. I doubt it though.
Plus, I don't really reboot that much. I leave my Windows workstations running for days, sometimes weeks. Windows XP is pretty stable as long as you're good enough to keep it running well - which is a chore, for sure. I mean, you need to be an experienced IT engineer. But it is stable under these conditions =)
He said the front-end, read: VIEWER runs on OSX. So yes, the MythTV Front-end VIEWER does work. With a back-end machine doing the heavy lifting, a MacMini attached to a TV would make a really nice front-end if you ask me. Small, quiet.
And what the hell do you think the V stands for? For everyone besides you, it stands for Video. It's the "R" that stands for Recorder. So it's more like a PVP, Personal Video Player. Your PR would mean Personal Recorder? Besides, MythTV front-end is more then a player.
Ohh, not even. It's not a question of disagreeing with you, it's a question of you purposefully attacking the community which you're saying this kind of generalist, elitist crap to.
You start your post with ignorant flames at the entire slashdot community, and end with whatever it was you were trying to say. If you actually tried cutting out the bullshit and just getting to the point, you'd get a much better response.
Your post is pantomime to saying "A) All your fuckers suck dick. B) Global Warming. Now, please comment on point B only, and if you don't ignore point A, I'll call you ignorant."
You notice how he's responding to everyone here with more crap? He wouldn't feel as though he needed to defend himself if he didn't feel just a little bit like a retard.
Ohh I dunno I'd like to see the original NES hold up against the grey tank that was the SNES. Not to mention the fact that almost every Nintendo developed problems playing any carts because of the loading mechanism. Remember blowing into the NES and/or cleaning the contacts on the cart? If not, you've never owned a NES.
Pfft. I use my Sharp 45" Aquos - LC-45GX6U @ 1920x1080@60Hz non interlaced. Unfortunately, it still gives me 120 less vertical pixels then the 23" HP monitor.. But it's fun to play counter strike on.
Do you have the Gyration mouse? I got one some time ago and it's a really neat toy for when you're sitting on the couch. If not, check it out, it's the coolest mouse and it works as a normal mouse when you put it down on a flat surface too. The matching keyboard is cool too.
Well thanks for being the xbox police, but you do need a VGA monitor that can handle sync on green, and not all games or apps will work with the even more modified bios then usual. Plus, you need a special cable, so that's extra cost and hassle getting one (or making one.) Still not changing my mind on the xbox being a viable desktop replacement (even at $100 for the unit.)
As far as using a game savegame to escape the executable lock, you still need to somehow get that savegame into the xbox. As far as I can tell, most people use the controller or something to get a memory card connected to a PC, which they then connect back to the Xbox. This would still involve a modified xbox controller cable. More effort, more hassle, more cost. It's cheaper then a mod chip, but it's still not getting us any closer to a very cheap commodity PC since it's still a 733Mhz celeron with 64MB (shared) RAM, which was still slow back in 2003 - you could get AthlonXP 3000+'s and 3Ghz Pentium 4's in 2003. Or, a very modest Pentium 4 2Ghz with 256MB RAM for cheap, cheap, cheap.
When the Xbox was brand new, it would have been pretty kickass to use it as a replcement PC, and I still enjoy tinkering around with it now. It's just not worth it anymore, which was the original point; by the time the Xbox 360 is hacked up enough (if it ever is) it will be equally as much just a toy.
No - by the time Xbox Linux ran acceptably enough to use as a PC, the Xbox wasn't $100. Right now, you might find them for $100 - do you think the Xbox 360 launch had anything to do with that?
Plus, even if you pay $100, you still need a keyboard and mouse, a cable to plug those into the Xbox controller port, and a mod chip. I guess there's ways around using a mod chip now, but those ways are only a year old. Plus, it's a 733Mhz celeron with 64MB shared memory. Not very modern and pretty much not worth the effort if your goal is a cheap PC (that can only connect to a TV.)
Indeed - by the time the original Xbox was functional enough to be a general-purpose machine running linux (real video support (still no 3D), sound, etc) it was a fraction of the power compared to what could be done with a $300 off the shelf PC.
Besides, at this point all we could hope for is to be able to unlock the region code bullshit and to allow copied DVD's to run. I think this in itself will be a very daunting task - although invariably there's always some weakness in the system somewhere that allows this type of thing, no matter how strong the encryption is. I am a firm believer in making backups of games, especially since kids have a hard time putting the discs back in their cases. Hell, so do I. These aren't $10 music CD's here - they're $50 and $60 games.
The original Xbox was the ultimate modding game console. Being able to replace the dashboard, run a shitload of home-brew apps, media players and emulators, not to mention full linux distributions - and to store everything on the hard drive.. How much better then that could you get? I don't see the Xbox 360 becomming anything close. I'm guessing that's one of the reasons they went with this PowerPC chip instead of an x86 chip - not as attractive to hack and not as easy to port to.
Why not? It's a game console. Remember playing SMB with your friends when you were little? The nintendo would sit out in front of the TV on the floor and the game pads would connect to that, so you could sit on the furnature while playing.
Small kids play these game systems, everyone knows that. They should be built tough. I'm guessing the Xbox 360 is probably built tough, but it only takes a single weak part to ruin all of the effort.
From what I've read, the cores on the Xbox 360 are very simple even though they're clocked high. A single G4 or G5 processor at a good clock speed would probably out perform the 360's CPU in real-world applications.
It seems like they've modeled their company the same way as a closed-source software development shop, and it's not working out using the GPL, so they're closing the source. I can't imagine why it didn't work. (sarcastic)
Think about it. Let's say Microsoft creates some tool, and develops it in house. They open the source under the GPL. Would you volunteer your time to help a company like Microsoft further develop their software? Sure, it's GPL, and so you can do whatever you want with it, but it's still an in-house project and there's no community surrounding it.
I believe the success of a GPL product is in no small measure based on the development model. They need to be designed in a way that people really feel like they have a stake in the project, that they can make a difference. When you have a company that ultimately has the last say and develops the code in-house, you have zero stake in the project. This company could just go and close-source the next version, just like they've done here. Sure, sure. You can fork the project. And that's probably what will happen here - and hopefully the fine developers that step up to the challenge will foster a better community then this company failed at creating.
There's a LOT of developers being paid to write GPL. Take a look at any large FOSS project - and look at the developers. A lot of them are paid for their work, and rightfully so. It's obvious that you're the one who's a 'zealot' here - a sort of reverse zealot that believes FOSS is a waste of time.
They wanted to start with version 3 because they already had Windows 3.0 on the market and they didn't want people to think this was older, or inferior. However, Windows NT 3 is the first version of Windows NT. It's not just "Windows 3 on NT Kernel" because it was not compatible with a large number of Windows 3.0/3.1 apps and almost no DOS apps. Windows 3.0 was a 100% 16-bit OS, and Windows NT 3 was a completely different and new 32-bit OS. Sure, it looked the same, but it wasn't.
So with Windows NT 3.0 being the first version of Windows NT, Windows NT 4.0 could be considered version 2. Windows 2000 is version 5 for Microsoft, but for us, it's actually only the third major release of Windows NT. Windows XP is almost identical to 2000 besides some UI changes, and only got a.1 revision change - Windows 2003 is almost the same as Windows 2000 and even microsoft only gave it another.1 to make 5.2 - for us, 3.2.
In the end I guess it doesn't really matter what the version numbers are, but it is fairly annoying when you see even larger magazines say things like "Windows 2003 is Microsoft's sixth major release of Windows NT."
They're both interchangable now-a-days. Motor oil, motor mounts, search engine, graphics engine, motor skills, deisel engine, nitro motor, motor city..
I understand that technically, way back when, a motor was purely electric in nature, and an engine meant internal combustion engine. But they've becomes so interchangable and mean lots of other things in modern english that it's really a waste of time trying to change that.
It's the main reason Microsoft went with years instead of versions, but they didn't seem to have a problem starting Windows NT at version 3. And, I think they knew it was going to take an extra long time to get the next Windows out the door, thus they didn't call it Windows 2002, they called it Windows XP.
Windows NT 3.0 = Windows NT 1.0 Windows NT 3.5 = Windows NT 1.5 Windows NT 4.0 = Windows NT 2.0 Windows 2000 = Windows NT 3.0 Windows Server 2003 = Windows NT 3.5
Yea, I agree, it's really not a big deal. I don't hate RFID, and I like being able to use it at places like work. I don't like the potential for abuse, and I think it's overkill to use it for a damned PVR, but hey, whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
It was my belief that if you offered your two weeks, and are willing and able to work for those two weeks, they are required to either keep you for the two weeks, pay you for the two weeks and ask you to stay home, or fire/lay you off. If they decided not to pay you and send you home, you could file for unemployment. So, they are pretty much required to give you the money.
Past that, you obviously didn't do anything wrong here, and the same has happened to myself and probably most other IT people. It's quite silly, really. When you're hired, they know nothing about you and yet after only a short few days (usually) they have to give you the proper access to perform your duties. No problem there. Yet after a year or more working with you, if you say you're leaving they immediately don't trust you. It doesn't make sense, but some managers are just stupid like that. Some even feel as though you've betrayed them by advancing your career, or it's a hit to their egos or something.
Some companies take advantage of the two weeks, some rush you out the door without letting you say goodbye.
I think he just missed out on the years 2001 - 2003.
Yea, isn't it funny how many of these (loud, alarmist) people are taking up the "victim" role these days? I guess they don't realize that most programming jobs are for internal company apps, not for-sale apps, and it doesn't matter if you use OSS or not - you still get paid. Except, with OSS, you feel a little better about yourself in the morning =)
.. Microsoft. Or you could write OSS software, and work for just about anyone else. As far as core apps and OS goes, at least.
Plus, most big OSS programming positions appear to be fully paid for gigs from lots of big companies. You could write Microsoft software, and work for
It seems to prove my overall feeling that although programmers might be very good at writing code, they don't always have any common sense.
It probably won't happen anyways. With each Windows release, they claim "Less reboots!" and in reality, there's no less.
Who knows, maybe with a "Reboot Framework.NET ASP 1.2.3.4 Live 2006" or whatever the hell they called it, we might actually see less reboots. I doubt it though.
Plus, I don't really reboot that much. I leave my Windows workstations running for days, sometimes weeks. Windows XP is pretty stable as long as you're good enough to keep it running well - which is a chore, for sure. I mean, you need to be an experienced IT engineer. But it is stable under these conditions =)
They're not just weird nose cells with an odd re-growth potential: They're stem cells. In adults, stem cells are found in fair supply within the nose.
There's a possibility of more effective treatment if they could use embryonic stem cells; unfortunately, they aren't readily available.
I'm no expert, but I did stay at a holiday inn last night and they had a Discovery special about this.
Versus.. you know. The real air guitar.
Are you slow?
He said the front-end, read: VIEWER runs on OSX. So yes, the MythTV Front-end VIEWER does work. With a back-end machine doing the heavy lifting, a MacMini attached to a TV would make a really nice front-end if you ask me. Small, quiet.
And what the hell do you think the V stands for? For everyone besides you, it stands for Video. It's the "R" that stands for Recorder. So it's more like a PVP, Personal Video Player. Your PR would mean Personal Recorder? Besides, MythTV front-end is more then a player.
I give up.
1,000,000 times. Start cracking, dipshit.
As far as the other way around, my work is done here.
Bite me, than fuck yourself harder then usual.
I've seen people nitpick, but jesus christ you're a whiney little bitch.
Ohh, not even. It's not a question of disagreeing with you, it's a question of you purposefully attacking the community which you're saying this kind of generalist, elitist crap to.
You start your post with ignorant flames at the entire slashdot community, and end with whatever it was you were trying to say. If you actually tried cutting out the bullshit and just getting to the point, you'd get a much better response.
Your post is pantomime to saying "A) All your fuckers suck dick. B) Global Warming. Now, please comment on point B only, and if you don't ignore point A, I'll call you ignorant."
Go on living in your own world.. must be nice.
You notice how he's responding to everyone here with more crap? He wouldn't feel as though he needed to defend himself if he didn't feel just a little bit like a retard.
Ohh I dunno I'd like to see the original NES hold up against the grey tank that was the SNES. Not to mention the fact that almost every Nintendo developed problems playing any carts because of the loading mechanism. Remember blowing into the NES and/or cleaning the contacts on the cart? If not, you've never owned a NES.
Don't be a luddite. The port runs really well.
Pfft. I use my Sharp 45" Aquos - LC-45GX6U @ 1920x1080@60Hz non interlaced. Unfortunately, it still gives me 120 less vertical pixels then the 23" HP monitor.. But it's fun to play counter strike on.
Do you have the Gyration mouse? I got one some time ago and it's a really neat toy for when you're sitting on the couch. If not, check it out, it's the coolest mouse and it works as a normal mouse when you put it down on a flat surface too. The matching keyboard is cool too.
Well thanks for being the xbox police, but you do need a VGA monitor that can handle sync on green, and not all games or apps will work with the even more modified bios then usual. Plus, you need a special cable, so that's extra cost and hassle getting one (or making one.) Still not changing my mind on the xbox being a viable desktop replacement (even at $100 for the unit.)
As far as using a game savegame to escape the executable lock, you still need to somehow get that savegame into the xbox. As far as I can tell, most people use the controller or something to get a memory card connected to a PC, which they then connect back to the Xbox. This would still involve a modified xbox controller cable. More effort, more hassle, more cost. It's cheaper then a mod chip, but it's still not getting us any closer to a very cheap commodity PC since it's still a 733Mhz celeron with 64MB (shared) RAM, which was still slow back in 2003 - you could get AthlonXP 3000+'s and 3Ghz Pentium 4's in 2003. Or, a very modest Pentium 4 2Ghz with 256MB RAM for cheap, cheap, cheap.
When the Xbox was brand new, it would have been pretty kickass to use it as a replcement PC, and I still enjoy tinkering around with it now. It's just not worth it anymore, which was the original point; by the time the Xbox 360 is hacked up enough (if it ever is) it will be equally as much just a toy.
Anyways, I'm through on this subject.
No - by the time Xbox Linux ran acceptably enough to use as a PC, the Xbox wasn't $100. Right now, you might find them for $100 - do you think the Xbox 360 launch had anything to do with that?
Plus, even if you pay $100, you still need a keyboard and mouse, a cable to plug those into the Xbox controller port, and a mod chip. I guess there's ways around using a mod chip now, but those ways are only a year old. Plus, it's a 733Mhz celeron with 64MB shared memory. Not very modern and pretty much not worth the effort if your goal is a cheap PC (that can only connect to a TV.)
Indeed - by the time the original Xbox was functional enough to be a general-purpose machine running linux (real video support (still no 3D), sound, etc) it was a fraction of the power compared to what could be done with a $300 off the shelf PC.
Besides, at this point all we could hope for is to be able to unlock the region code bullshit and to allow copied DVD's to run. I think this in itself will be a very daunting task - although invariably there's always some weakness in the system somewhere that allows this type of thing, no matter how strong the encryption is. I am a firm believer in making backups of games, especially since kids have a hard time putting the discs back in their cases. Hell, so do I. These aren't $10 music CD's here - they're $50 and $60 games.
The original Xbox was the ultimate modding game console. Being able to replace the dashboard, run a shitload of home-brew apps, media players and emulators, not to mention full linux distributions - and to store everything on the hard drive.. How much better then that could you get? I don't see the Xbox 360 becomming anything close. I'm guessing that's one of the reasons they went with this PowerPC chip instead of an x86 chip - not as attractive to hack and not as easy to port to.
The Xbox 360 CPU cores are very simple and a full G5 processor should be able to outperform the Xbox in any real world applications.
Why not? It's a game console. Remember playing SMB with your friends when you were little? The nintendo would sit out in front of the TV on the floor and the game pads would connect to that, so you could sit on the furnature while playing.
Small kids play these game systems, everyone knows that. They should be built tough. I'm guessing the Xbox 360 is probably built tough, but it only takes a single weak part to ruin all of the effort.
From what I've read, the cores on the Xbox 360 are very simple even though they're clocked high. A single G4 or G5 processor at a good clock speed would probably out perform the 360's CPU in real-world applications.
It seems like they've modeled their company the same way as a closed-source software development shop, and it's not working out using the GPL, so they're closing the source. I can't imagine why it didn't work. (sarcastic)
Think about it. Let's say Microsoft creates some tool, and develops it in house. They open the source under the GPL. Would you volunteer your time to help a company like Microsoft further develop their software? Sure, it's GPL, and so you can do whatever you want with it, but it's still an in-house project and there's no community surrounding it.
I believe the success of a GPL product is in no small measure based on the development model. They need to be designed in a way that people really feel like they have a stake in the project, that they can make a difference. When you have a company that ultimately has the last say and develops the code in-house, you have zero stake in the project. This company could just go and close-source the next version, just like they've done here. Sure, sure. You can fork the project. And that's probably what will happen here - and hopefully the fine developers that step up to the challenge will foster a better community then this company failed at creating.
There's a LOT of developers being paid to write GPL. Take a look at any large FOSS project - and look at the developers. A lot of them are paid for their work, and rightfully so. It's obvious that you're the one who's a 'zealot' here - a sort of reverse zealot that believes FOSS is a waste of time.
Yea, actually, you're not recalling correctly.
.1 revision change - Windows 2003 is almost the same as Windows 2000 and even microsoft only gave it another .1 to make 5.2 - for us, 3.2.
They wanted to start with version 3 because they already had Windows 3.0 on the market and they didn't want people to think this was older, or inferior. However, Windows NT 3 is the first version of Windows NT. It's not just "Windows 3 on NT Kernel" because it was not compatible with a large number of Windows 3.0/3.1 apps and almost no DOS apps. Windows 3.0 was a 100% 16-bit OS, and Windows NT 3 was a completely different and new 32-bit OS. Sure, it looked the same, but it wasn't.
So with Windows NT 3.0 being the first version of Windows NT, Windows NT 4.0 could be considered version 2. Windows 2000 is version 5 for Microsoft, but for us, it's actually only the third major release of Windows NT. Windows XP is almost identical to 2000 besides some UI changes, and only got a
In the end I guess it doesn't really matter what the version numbers are, but it is fairly annoying when you see even larger magazines say things like "Windows 2003 is Microsoft's sixth major release of Windows NT."
Symantecs.
They're both interchangable now-a-days. Motor oil, motor mounts, search engine, graphics engine, motor skills, deisel engine, nitro motor, motor city..
I understand that technically, way back when, a motor was purely electric in nature, and an engine meant internal combustion engine. But they've becomes so interchangable and mean lots of other things in modern english that it's really a waste of time trying to change that.
It's the main reason Microsoft went with years instead of versions, but they didn't seem to have a problem starting Windows NT at version 3. And, I think they knew it was going to take an extra long time to get the next Windows out the door, thus they didn't call it Windows 2002, they called it Windows XP.
Windows NT 3.0 = Windows NT 1.0
Windows NT 3.5 = Windows NT 1.5
Windows NT 4.0 = Windows NT 2.0
Windows 2000 = Windows NT 3.0
Windows Server 2003 = Windows NT 3.5
Oh well, sorry for rambling on.
Yea, I agree, it's really not a big deal. I don't hate RFID, and I like being able to use it at places like work. I don't like the potential for abuse, and I think it's overkill to use it for a damned PVR, but hey, whatever.