You write: Linux on the desktop is a long long way off from being as easy to use for beginners as windows is.
I've done more than my share of teaching total newbies how to use Windows. There's nothing intrinsically logical or sensible about the Windows desktop (95, 2K, XP), Windows' naming schemes, etc. It's extraordinarily difficult for an adult newbie to pick up. -- We tend to think of Windows as "easier-to-use" simply, I think, because of familiarity. Ditto with the Mac interface -- it's easy to use once you've learned how to use it. Come to Mac from a pure Windows or pure newbie background and there's still a learning curve.
Frankly, I don't think there will ever be a desktop that is "simple to use" from a newbie standpoint (at least until the computers can engage in an intelligent dialogue with the user and actually figure out what the user wants to do).
Consequently, I don't think any great re-imaging of the Linux (or any other) desktop is particularly required. Rather, I think the greater value will be in continuing to support a diversity of desktops with some focusing on new-user needs as much as others focus on the needs of sophisticated users.
After wading through four levels of menus on a default KDE install, I wish I had the skills to do some interface design myself. Grin.
Excellent advice here, I hope you do have access to a University Library and are able to use the fine databases mentioned above -- I might CINAHL to the list.
Too often folks seem to think that authoritative information can be found via google. It happens at times, but the open internet is not a reliable source for research. Libraries pay big money for access to these resources because of their quality -- and that's what you need. Not a bunch of opinions and anecdotes, but quantitative and qualitative information that you can use to carry on an articulate and informed dialogue with the health professionals treating your daughter.
Even large public libraries often have access to some fairly sophisticated databases. And, you'll find, librarians will actually listen carefully to find out what you need and will go the extra mile to help you locate the information you require.
Hope the parent post gets moderated up. It's excellent advice.
He writes: Factual error: Hobbits can't grow beards
Now, is this factual error about a fictional character? No, this is fiction. So, this is a fictional error about a fictional character. From which we deduce:
I think there are a lot of misconceptions about how libraries work and the capabilities of the average public library here. Most libraries are underfunded, staffed by persons without extensive technical skills, initimidated by "community opinion" and beholden to the Gates Foundation (this is not a bad thing . . . the Gates Foundation is A Good Thing that has done wonders for public libraries in our digitially divided society.) You want to make a positive contribution -- volunteer your tech skills at your local library. Build relationships with your librarians and your community and then start influencing folks. Don't just throw software and rhetoric at your local public library and expect them to handle it. (I've been working as a technical person in libraries and consulting with libraries since 1986.)
1. The ethics of this: Hmmm. The golden rule . . . do unto others. I don't think that applies much to a marketing association, but I guess I'd apply it to the notion of calling individuals at home.
2. It's who you do business with: Interestingly enough, I have two phone companies. One is Cox Communications. Within a couple of days of getting that phone number, I was beseiged with telemarketers and it has never let up. I've also got a number from Sprint. I've had that number for a couple of years. Not a single telemarketing call.
3. A rant So I call Qwest to get a home phone number. They generously offer to charge me only $3 or $4 per month to NOT publish my phone number. Okay. Can you say ex-tor-tion? I come to your store and generously offer to charge you only $500 per month to NOT set your store on fire. It's a great business plan: pay me to not do something. Sort of like a SCO license, I guess.
Dual screen tablets, laptops, and even desktops with swiveling lcd dual monitors were all over Comdex this year.
Old news.
Looked at several, including Estari, and was less impressed than I expected to be -- less utility than one would think except for some specialized functions.
Re:The Flaw - possible spoilers
on
Taken?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Nope. It wasn't lost on me. I just didn't find it terribly compelling and/or interesting.
Okay, you're a behavioral biologist studying chimps and you notice that human females have lost estrus as a result of evolution, so you undertake a cross-species hybridization program to . ..
Yeah. Right.
Now, if they needed to breed superior warriors to fight an enemy race . . .
The Flaw - possible spoilers
on
Taken?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Yes, I feel a bit taken by Taken. IMO, the flaw with this particular tale was a lack of clear conclusion. It became fairly obvious by about hour 16, that the author really never decided for himself what the aliens were really doing. Instead, we got a bunch of vagueness about post-reptilian brains and the "next step in evolution." Yawn.
I'm sure I'm not the only long-term sci-fi fan who reacts to the premise "the next stage of human evolution" with ennui and disinterest.
The lack of a compelling motivation for the aliens -- and just saying "it's beyond our understanding" is nothing more than a cop-out -- is the fatal flaw in Taken.
I liked the characterization -- particularly the character of Mary, one of the best cold-hearted bitches to come down the track in a while -- the extended story line, many (but not all) of the special effects, and the overall concept. However, the lack of any real conclusion spoiled the mix. Yes, I'm sorry the mother had to let go of the little girl, but that's hardly an emotional conclusion that fit the overall piece -- sort of like framing Romeo and Juliet in terms of Nurse's little girl growing up.
Sigh.
Julian May. Alfred Bester. Poul Anderson. People who knew how to end a story.
Let's try to remember that unions were formed - despite significant governmental repression - to solve a very real set of problems being experienced by the vast majority of industrial workers. Unionizers were not campaigning for longer coffee breaks or free dental. Early labor organizers were fighting for basic human rights and what we would consider the most fundamental of humane treatment. This was done when government and private agencies (remember Pinkerton?) employed violence, torture and executions to enforce the employer's "rights."
Certainly unions became something else after the years of struggle ended. They shifted their concerns. Like any other institution, they evolved, and not necessarily in consistently productive directions. Consequently, we tend to emphasize the negative effects of present-day unionism and forget how it came about. This is a common phenomenon -- another quick example: the FDA, designed to make sure you didn't fall over dead when you ate your hamburger, is now derided for being slow and bureaucratic. So, a basic historical principle: you can't understand a mature institution by looking at it's mature behavior.
That said, let's look at the present discussion.
Unless and until current employment conditions are perceived as inhumane, unjust and evil by a substantial number of employees, employers will basically have carte blanche within those parameters. Unless conditions become (or are perceived to be) so intolerable, there will be no real attempt to find solutions that better those conditions. It is in the interests of employers to better conditions only if it improves productivity.
Besides, the solution to the problems of the capitalist triumph -- anarcho-syndicalism -- has already been found. We simply have to wait until the capitalists, unrestricted by a government they own and laws and law enforcement they control, decide to tighten the reins a little too far. Of course, well-educated employers probably won't regard their employees as mere resources, but continue to regard their employees as people.
Pleased to see the settlement. I've made extensive use of Nusphere's mysql-related product line and PHPEd. Excellent products in a nicely bundled form. BTW, I think Nusphere has some of the best mySQL training around.
Brento makes a very valuable point in his first paragraph. As a manager with 30-some years experience, I've seen many cases where employees felt they were being discriminated against (for age, sex, sexual orientation, or race) but, at the same time, there were serious performance problems or behaviors that the employee failed to correct -- often claiming the behaviors were irrelevant or didn't even exist.
Out of a dozen or so instances I can think of, there was only one (a sexual orientation case) where I agreed with the employee that the manager's case against him was bogus and rooted in personal animosity. Of course, in my state, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is legal, so the employee lost. Nonetheless, the other 11 or so cases make me skeptical as to the claims being offered here. I could be wrong, but I'm a crusty old cynic.
And now I'm going to sound like a prejudicial old coot . . .
My experience tells me that young people (males particularly) tend to be non-reflective and have a fair amount of trouble realistically assessing their behaviors (both good and bad).
That said, I'd offer the following advice:
Answer the question: do I like (or need) this job enough that I'm willing to make reasonale changes to my behavior? If the answer is yes, continue:
Talk to the boss and ask what specific behaviors need changing. If the boss says "none," ask for permission to speak to the IT Director yourself. [Bear in mind that the boss may be trying to get you to change your behavior by making you think upper management is displeased -- maybe they aren't and the boss is playing some game of his own for his own reasons. The IT Director may love you and the boss may actually be the one trying to get you to leave]. If you get to talk to the IT Director, lay out the situation clearly, with more detail than you have done here. The upshot should be respectful requests to (1) understand the situation and (2) understand if the IT director has concerns about your behavior and what they are.
In any event, immediately go to your company's HR department and lay out the situation clearly and non-emotionally.
The essence of the advice is this: Failing to confront this, will just stress you out and get you no where. You must clarify three things: (1) where you stand on the job, (2) what the actual situation is, and (3) if you need to make changes to alter the situation.
Well, these days you can write a history thesis on just about anything....
As a professional historian, I actually think the greater potential impact of digital media on the historical record lies in it's vulnerability. Those who have undertaken the task of "rewriting history" to fit a particular agenda or world view in the past faced a profound obstacle: the existance of the physical record. Burning books, destroying documents, and manufacturing evidence took a lot of energy on the part of the Soviets & the Nazis [ and lots of others ]. Will electronic documentation have the same persistence that the physical record had? Or will the tyrant-de-jour simply order the re-creation of the historical record by virtue of a well-constructed worm? You'll recall the industry of historical revision in Brave New World. Hmmm... interesting, but I won't lose sleep over it.
As a Nebraskan, I wasn't terribly surprised to see the lawyer for this suit was named as "John DeCamp." Those of us in Nebraska have long experience with this man's erratic behavior, wild charges, publicity seeking and general fuzzy-headedness (just my opinion, of course). For example, do a Google search on "John DeCamp Nebraska." You'll get to read about a long series of unsubstantiated litigation claiming DeCamps' clients as victims of cultism and satanic abuse . . . and that's just for starters. Sigh.
I find it interesting that the descriptive paragraph that introduces this letter describes it as "demanding" the name change. Interesting what a word can do. Viz:
- actually reading the letter doesn't give the impression that the author is "demanding" the name change. He states he is "asking" twice. Yet the comments from slashdot readers are talking about "litigation," "demands," etc.
- The discussion of this letter on Linux Today, where there is no editorial introduction, just the text of the letter, is far more reasoned and moderate.
- Gee, he contacted the developers and they did not address the issue. Did he immediately sue? Nope. Is this a cease and desist order? Nope. Is this a demand . . . I hardly think so and I doubt that it deserves the characterizations it is receiving in some of these posts.
I think this points out what journalists know and some have yet to learn: the description of the content is as - or even more significant - than the content itself.
Back in the late 1960's and early 70's there was considerable interest in what were called "New Games." These were an attempt to develop group games (generally somewhat physical in nature) that were essentially cooperative, avoiding "winning" and "losing." Some of the games are quite a bit of fun. I used several of them when I was teaching/leading children's groups. The values predisposition was toward cooperation, interaction, self-organizing, etc. Sounds sort of what you're interested in.
The new games were described in a couple of nice, illustrated books. You can probably track these down at your local library or your library can get them through Interlibrary Loan. Most require no or household items for equipment:
New Games Foundation
The new games book / New Games Foundation ; edited by Andrew Fluegelman
Garden City, N.Y. : Dolphin Books, 1976New York :
Fluegelman, Andrew
More new games! -- and playful ideas from the New Games Foundation / text and photographs by Andrew Fluegelman
Dolphin Books/Doubleday, 1981
This issue - cross-browser compatibility - has been around forever. From the early days of "This site best viewed with xxxx" to FrontPage sites where JavaScript errors abound, this has been argued and discussed to death.
The most cogent discussions -- see Jakob Nielsen.
The bottom line:
- web sites that customize for a single browser or platform lose readers/customers. It's up to the site/company to decide how many customers they want to lose.
- too much customization will eventually backfire.
- public institutions (e.g. universities, etc) based in the US are bound to provide electronic accessibility to the disabled. There haven't been too many lawsuits yet, but there will be more. Browser customization works against accessibility.
Ideally, it's a "natural selection" sort of process. Lots of offspring (individually written text editors) that go out into the big hostile environment (the internet/geekdom, etc.). Those that survive produce more offspring (contributions from other coders), gradually changing and mutating to better fill their niche or even branching off to give rise to new offspring. You don't structure or control a process like this. Quite properly, the focus should be on contributing to diversity rather than limiting it.
Books can only do so much. "Peopleware" was an excellent suggestion. The real skills, however, come from experience. I suggest you look for someone in the organization or in a related organization who's willing to do some mentoring. Having an experienced soundingboard is worth more than a few books.
My own cardinal rules:
(1) The problem is not making a mistake, it's how you handle the mistakes you make.
(2) At some basic level, management is getting other people to do things. Generally, the other people know how to do it better than you.
(3) Always hire people who are smarter than you are. Your goal is to encourage creativity and brilliance, not protect your perogatives.
(4) Techies work best when encouraged (as opposed to being directed.) Play is important.
(5) Play is not the same thing as adolescent behavior.
I've been following the wonderful world of search engines for several years in my role as web educator and maintainer for a University library. Skewed results seem to be an inevitable part of commercial engines - Alta Vista, et. al. were doing it long before Google burst on the scene. One of the great weaknesses of the Internet is the inadequacy of search engines and directories in support of serious research. While librarians seem to think that they could nicely organize the whole thing, I have my doubts that Dublin Core metadata or some extension of MARC into site classification will ever solve the problem. That said, Google is still probably the best general, "comprehensive" search tool available today. Expecting dispassionate morality from a business entity, however, is naive -- so naive that I'm a bit surprised that SlashDot's cynical staffers find it noteworthy. If you'd like to dip into the sordid world of internet search tools check out Search Engine Watch -- it's a good starting point to find out about business relationships as well as characteristics and performance of the various engines.
I'm not a geek, but I manage them on TV. Well, at work actually.
When the technical staff convinced me to transition our shop from NT to Linux about two years ago, I had to begin learning Linux. As I said above, I'm not a programmer or a geek -- simply one of those (either despised or desired) "regular users" that Linux advocates (either regard as unimportant or want to assimilate).
So, my first experiences were with command line and AfterStep (which I found difficult to use) but then quickly moved to the emerging KDE and GNOME environments. GNOME, more than anything else, let me make the transition from Windows user to full-time Linux desktop user. I picked up enough along the way to prefer command-line to file manager, but -- since my orientation is not server management but is, indeed, paperwork, planning, project management, etc. -- the GUI is what lets me get my work done. Without GNOME (or KDE) I wouldn't be using Linux full time.
As a "desktop user" I see things a little differently: I need a better browser and a much better e-mail client. WordPerfect meets my "office" needs (although I see instabilities in Wine [we joke: "Corel WordPerfect . . . bringing the instability of Windows to the Linux desktop"]).
I think it's a matter of focus. Commercial operations that want the desktop users for Linux should pursue initiatives like the GNOME Foundation and support KDE. Those who are interested in other environments should continue on the course that has produced so much.
There are a few difficulties left on the desktop, but I notice that the Windows users who see me work on my GNOME Helix desktop are already amazed and are quite intrigued. I think there's more potential for Linux on the desktop than is generally realized by either the geek community or Windows apologists. A highly functional, customizable, tool-rich desktop will first impress and then entice those users. Desktop users are just as sick of clunky Windows interfaces and instabilities as techies -- many of them just don't realize it yet.
I'm not a network administrator, but I "manage" (in the business/personnel) sense, the network operations in our shop.
I sent our network admin through RHCE (and was there taking one of the lead-in courses) at Red Hat. While many of the comments in this batch seem to assume that all certification consists of is a written exam, that's not true of the RHCE. It has a high failure rate. Written responses are only a third of the score -- the rest is hands-on debugging and server configuration. I've taken all the classes up to the RHCE, but there's not a chance in hell I'd be able to pass the exam -- because I don't have the years of experience that it takes to succeed when you get off the paper and in front of the broken box.
Upshot: I'm one of the guys who hires geeks. Because I know what's involved, I'll give preference (and extra cash) for an RHCE -- as long as they keep the high standards up that RedHat's established so far.
Wouldn't it be great if the other certification vendors -- LinuxCare, whoever -- made Linux certification mean something more than the toilet paper MSCE?
Try reading the help instructions at http://www.google.com/help.html.
I work in an academic research library. We do lots of evaluation of search tools (including search engines). Google makes our recommended list because of it's strength in returning relevant results. It is so good, that if the technology is patentable, it probably should be. Other search engines that make the recommended list (Alta Vista and Infoseek) carry the caution that you must use advanced search features and know how to use the search tool in order to filter out irrelevancies. Northern Light makes the list because of categorization and the fact that it includes about 5,000 publications not indexed else where.
Oh, well. We can say it ten zillion times and students still don't pay attention: TAKE TIME TO READ THE SEARCH TOOL'S HELP FILES.
Slashdot Mirror
I've done more than my share of teaching total newbies how to use Windows. There's nothing intrinsically logical or sensible about the Windows desktop (95, 2K, XP), Windows' naming schemes, etc. It's extraordinarily difficult for an adult newbie to pick up. -- We tend to think of Windows as "easier-to-use" simply, I think, because of familiarity. Ditto with the Mac interface -- it's easy to use once you've learned how to use it. Come to Mac from a pure Windows or pure newbie background and there's still a learning curve.
Frankly, I don't think there will ever be a desktop that is "simple to use" from a newbie standpoint (at least until the computers can engage in an intelligent dialogue with the user and actually figure out what the user wants to do).
Consequently, I don't think any great re-imaging of the Linux (or any other) desktop is particularly required. Rather, I think the greater value will be in continuing to support a diversity of desktops with some focusing on new-user needs as much as others focus on the needs of sophisticated users.
After wading through four levels of menus on a default KDE install, I wish I had the skills to do some interface design myself. Grin.
Excellent advice here, I hope you do have access to a University Library and are able to use the fine databases mentioned above -- I might CINAHL to the list.
Too often folks seem to think that authoritative information can be found via google. It happens at times, but the open internet is not a reliable source for research. Libraries pay big money for access to these resources because of their quality -- and that's what you need. Not a bunch of opinions and anecdotes, but quantitative and qualitative information that you can use to carry on an articulate and informed dialogue with the health professionals treating your daughter.
Even large public libraries often have access to some fairly sophisticated databases. And, you'll find, librarians will actually listen carefully to find out what you need and will go the extra mile to help you locate the information you require.
Hope the parent post gets moderated up. It's excellent advice.
Now, is this factual error about a fictional character? No, this is fiction. So, this is a fictional error about a fictional character. From which we deduce:
Therefore:
I finally understand how my ex-wife thinks.
I think there are a lot of misconceptions about how libraries work and the capabilities of the average public library here. Most libraries are underfunded, staffed by persons without extensive technical skills, initimidated by "community opinion" and beholden to the Gates Foundation (this is not a bad thing . . . the Gates Foundation is A Good Thing that has done wonders for public libraries in our digitially divided society.)
You want to make a positive contribution -- volunteer your tech skills at your local library. Build relationships with your librarians and your community and then start influencing folks. Don't just throw software and rhetoric at your local public library and expect them to handle it.
(I've been working as a technical person in libraries and consulting with libraries since 1986.)
1. The ethics of this:
Hmmm. The golden rule . . . do unto others. I don't think that applies much to a marketing association, but I guess I'd apply it to the notion of calling individuals at home.
2. It's who you do business with:
Interestingly enough, I have two phone companies.
One is Cox Communications. Within a couple of days of getting that phone number, I was beseiged with telemarketers and it has never let up.
I've also got a number from Sprint. I've had that number for a couple of years. Not a single telemarketing call.
3. A rant
So I call Qwest to get a home phone number. They generously offer to charge me only $3 or $4 per month to NOT publish my phone number.
Okay.
Can you say ex-tor-tion?
I come to your store and generously offer to charge you only $500 per month to NOT set your store on fire.
It's a great business plan: pay me to not do something. Sort of like a SCO license, I guess.
You should find this useful:
Web Sites for Kids from the American Library Association.
Have fun.
It's called a shutter.
I'm sure he and his uncle are quite excited.
Dual screen tablets, laptops, and even desktops with swiveling lcd dual monitors were all over Comdex this year.
Old news.
Looked at several, including Estari, and was less impressed than I expected to be -- less utility than one would think except for some specialized functions.
Nope. It wasn't lost on me. I just didn't find it terribly compelling and/or interesting.
.
Okay, you're a behavioral biologist studying chimps and you notice that human females have lost estrus as a result of evolution, so you undertake a cross-species hybridization program to . .
Yeah. Right.
Now, if they needed to breed superior warriors to fight an enemy race . . .
Yes, I feel a bit taken by Taken. IMO, the flaw with this particular tale was a lack of clear conclusion. It became fairly obvious by about hour 16, that the author really never decided for himself what the aliens were really doing. Instead, we got a bunch of vagueness about post-reptilian brains and the "next step in evolution." Yawn.
I'm sure I'm not the only long-term sci-fi fan who reacts to the premise "the next stage of human evolution" with ennui and disinterest.
The lack of a compelling motivation for the aliens -- and just saying "it's beyond our understanding" is nothing more than a cop-out -- is the fatal flaw in Taken.
I liked the characterization -- particularly the character of Mary, one of the best cold-hearted bitches to come down the track in a while -- the extended story line, many (but not all) of the special effects, and the overall concept. However, the lack of any real conclusion spoiled the mix. Yes, I'm sorry the mother had to let go of the little girl, but that's hardly an emotional conclusion that fit the overall piece -- sort of like framing Romeo and Juliet in terms of Nurse's little girl growing up.
Sigh.
Julian May.
Alfred Bester.
Poul Anderson.
People who knew how to end a story.
Certainly unions became something else after the years of struggle ended. They shifted their concerns. Like any other institution, they evolved, and not necessarily in consistently productive directions. Consequently, we tend to emphasize the negative effects of present-day unionism and forget how it came about. This is a common phenomenon -- another quick example: the FDA, designed to make sure you didn't fall over dead when you ate your hamburger, is now derided for being slow and bureaucratic. So, a basic historical principle: you can't understand a mature institution by looking at it's mature behavior.
That said, let's look at the present discussion.
Unless and until current employment conditions are perceived as inhumane, unjust and evil by a substantial number of employees, employers will basically have carte blanche within those parameters. Unless conditions become (or are perceived to be) so intolerable, there will be no real attempt to find solutions that better those conditions. It is in the interests of employers to better conditions only if it improves productivity.
Besides, the solution to the problems of the capitalist triumph -- anarcho-syndicalism -- has already been found. We simply have to wait until the capitalists, unrestricted by a government they own and laws and law enforcement they control, decide to tighten the reins a little too far. Of course, well-educated employers probably won't regard their employees as mere resources, but continue to regard their employees as people.
Damn. No grounds for revolution.
Trained as an historian, living as a coder.
Pleased to see the settlement. I've made extensive use of Nusphere's mysql-related product line and PHPEd. Excellent products in a nicely bundled form. BTW, I think Nusphere has some of the best mySQL training around.
Unlikely. A little research yeilds better results.
http://www.ivf.org/phys.html
Out of a dozen or so instances I can think of, there was only one (a sexual orientation case) where I agreed with the employee that the manager's case against him was bogus and rooted in personal animosity. Of course, in my state, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is legal, so the employee lost. Nonetheless, the other 11 or so cases make me skeptical as to the claims being offered here. I could be wrong, but I'm a crusty old cynic.
And now I'm going to sound like a prejudicial old coot . . .
That said, I'd offer the following advice:
The essence of the advice is this: Failing to confront this, will just stress you out and get you no where. You must clarify three things: (1) where you stand on the job, (2) what the actual situation is, and (3) if you need to make changes to alter the situation.
Best of luck.
Well, these days you can write a history thesis on just about anything....
As a professional historian, I actually think the greater potential impact of digital media on the historical record lies in it's vulnerability. Those who have undertaken the task of "rewriting history" to fit a particular agenda or world view in the past faced a profound obstacle: the existance of the physical record. Burning books, destroying documents, and manufacturing evidence took a lot of energy on the part of the Soviets & the Nazis [ and lots of others ]. Will electronic documentation have the same persistence that the physical record had? Or will the tyrant-de-jour simply order the re-creation of the historical record by virtue of a well-constructed worm? You'll recall the industry of historical revision in Brave New World. Hmmm... interesting, but I won't lose sleep over it.
As a Nebraskan, I wasn't terribly surprised to see the lawyer for this suit was named as "John DeCamp." Those of us in Nebraska have long experience with this man's erratic behavior, wild charges, publicity seeking and general fuzzy-headedness (just my opinion, of course). For example, do a Google search on "John DeCamp Nebraska." You'll get to read about a long series of unsubstantiated litigation claiming DeCamps' clients as victims of cultism and satanic abuse . . . and that's just for starters. Sigh.
I find it interesting that the descriptive paragraph that introduces this letter describes it as "demanding" the name change. Interesting what a word can do. Viz:
- actually reading the letter doesn't give the impression that the author is "demanding" the name change. He states he is "asking" twice. Yet the comments from slashdot readers are talking about "litigation," "demands," etc.
- The discussion of this letter on Linux Today, where there is no editorial introduction, just the text of the letter, is far more reasoned and moderate.
- Gee, he contacted the developers and they did not address the issue. Did he immediately sue? Nope. Is this a cease and desist order? Nope. Is this a demand . . . I hardly think so and I doubt that it deserves the characterizations it is receiving in some of these posts.
I think this points out what journalists know and some have yet to learn: the description of the content is as - or even more significant - than the content itself.
Back in the late 1960's and early 70's there was considerable interest in what were called "New Games." These were an attempt to develop group games (generally somewhat physical in nature) that were essentially cooperative, avoiding "winning" and "losing." Some of the games are quite a bit of fun. I used several of them when I was teaching/leading children's groups. The values predisposition was toward cooperation, interaction, self-organizing, etc. Sounds sort of what you're interested in. The new games were described in a couple of nice, illustrated books. You can probably track these down at your local library or your library can get them through Interlibrary Loan. Most require no or household items for equipment: New Games Foundation The new games book / New Games Foundation ; edited by Andrew Fluegelman Garden City, N.Y. : Dolphin Books, 1976New York : Fluegelman, Andrew More new games! -- and playful ideas from the New Games Foundation / text and photographs by Andrew Fluegelman Dolphin Books/Doubleday, 1981
This issue - cross-browser compatibility - has been around forever. From the early days of "This site best viewed with xxxx" to FrontPage sites where JavaScript errors abound, this has been argued and discussed to death.
The most cogent discussions -- see Jakob Nielsen.
The bottom line:
- web sites that customize for a single browser or platform lose readers/customers. It's up to the site/company to decide how many customers they want to lose.
- too much customization will eventually backfire.
- public institutions (e.g. universities, etc) based in the US are bound to provide electronic accessibility to the disabled. There haven't been too many lawsuits yet, but there will be more. Browser customization works against accessibility.
Yawn.
Ideally, it's a "natural selection" sort of process. Lots of offspring (individually written text editors) that go out into the big hostile environment (the internet/geekdom, etc.). Those that survive produce more offspring (contributions from other coders), gradually changing and mutating to better fill their niche or even branching off to give rise to new offspring. You don't structure or control a process like this. Quite properly, the focus should be on contributing to diversity rather than limiting it.
Books can only do so much. "Peopleware" was an excellent suggestion. The real skills, however, come from experience. I suggest you look for someone in the organization or in a related organization who's willing to do some mentoring. Having an experienced soundingboard is worth more than a few books.
My own cardinal rules:
(1) The problem is not making a mistake, it's how you handle the mistakes you make.
(2) At some basic level, management is getting other people to do things. Generally, the other people know how to do it better than you.
(3) Always hire people who are smarter than you are. Your goal is to encourage creativity and brilliance, not protect your perogatives.
(4) Techies work best when encouraged (as opposed to being directed.) Play is important.
(5) Play is not the same thing as adolescent behavior.
Best of luck.
I've been following the wonderful world of search engines for several years in my role as web educator and maintainer for a University library. Skewed results seem to be an inevitable part of commercial engines - Alta Vista, et. al. were doing it long before Google burst on the scene. One of the great weaknesses of the Internet is the inadequacy of search engines and directories in support of serious research. While librarians seem to think that they could nicely organize the whole thing, I have my doubts that Dublin Core metadata or some extension of MARC into site classification will ever solve the problem. That said, Google is still probably the best general, "comprehensive" search tool available today. Expecting dispassionate morality from a business entity, however, is naive -- so naive that I'm a bit surprised that SlashDot's cynical staffers find it noteworthy. If you'd like to dip into the sordid world of internet search tools check out Search Engine Watch -- it's a good starting point to find out about business relationships as well as characteristics and performance of the various engines.
I'm not a geek, but I manage them on TV. Well, at work actually.
When the technical staff convinced me to transition our shop from NT to Linux about two years ago, I had to begin learning Linux. As I said above, I'm not a programmer or a geek -- simply one of those (either despised or desired) "regular users" that Linux advocates (either regard as unimportant or want to assimilate).
So, my first experiences were with command line and AfterStep (which I found difficult to use) but then quickly moved to the emerging KDE and GNOME environments. GNOME, more than anything else, let me make the transition from Windows user to full-time Linux desktop user. I picked up enough along the way to prefer command-line to file manager, but -- since my orientation is not server management but is, indeed, paperwork, planning, project management, etc. -- the GUI is what lets me get my work done. Without GNOME (or KDE) I wouldn't be using Linux full time.
As a "desktop user" I see things a little differently: I need a better browser and a much better e-mail client. WordPerfect meets my "office" needs (although I see instabilities in Wine [we joke: "Corel WordPerfect . . . bringing the instability of Windows to the Linux desktop"]).
I think it's a matter of focus. Commercial operations that want the desktop users for Linux should pursue initiatives like the GNOME Foundation and support KDE. Those who are interested in other environments should continue on the course that has produced so much.
There are a few difficulties left on the desktop, but I notice that the Windows users who see me work on my GNOME Helix desktop are already amazed and are quite intrigued. I think there's more potential for Linux on the desktop than is generally realized by either the geek community or Windows apologists. A highly functional, customizable, tool-rich desktop will first impress and then entice those users. Desktop users are just as sick of clunky Windows interfaces and instabilities as techies -- many of them just don't realize it yet.
I'm not a network administrator, but I "manage" (in the business/personnel) sense, the network operations in our shop.
I sent our network admin through RHCE (and was there taking one of the lead-in courses) at Red Hat. While many of the comments in this batch seem to assume that all certification consists of is a written exam, that's not true of the RHCE. It has a high failure rate. Written responses are only a third of the score -- the rest is hands-on debugging and server configuration. I've taken all the classes up to the RHCE, but there's not a chance in hell I'd be able to pass the exam -- because I don't have the years of experience that it takes to succeed when you get off the paper and in front of the broken box.
Upshot: I'm one of the guys who hires geeks. Because I know what's involved, I'll give preference (and extra cash) for an RHCE -- as long as they keep the high standards up that RedHat's established so far.
Wouldn't it be great if the other certification vendors -- LinuxCare, whoever -- made Linux certification mean something more than the toilet paper MSCE?
Try reading the help instructions at http://www.google.com/help.html.
I work in an academic research library. We do lots of evaluation of search tools (including search engines). Google makes our recommended list because of it's strength in returning relevant results. It is so good, that if the technology is patentable, it probably should be. Other search engines that make the recommended list (Alta Vista and Infoseek) carry the caution that you must use advanced search features and know how to use the search tool in order to filter out irrelevancies. Northern Light makes the list because of categorization and the fact that it includes about 5,000 publications not indexed else where.
Oh, well. We can say it ten zillion times and students still don't pay attention: TAKE TIME TO READ THE SEARCH TOOL'S HELP FILES.