People need to realize that making a successful Office competitor doesn't equate to making it less "bloated and slow", or adding any sort of all-important feature set.
The only way any product in this space is going to go places is if it works just like Office, acts just like Office, feels just like Office, etc. Office is the standard, and for 99% of people that use it, it's flawless. Any deviation from this standard suite, even if it's an improvement, is nothing but a nuisance to the average user.
A common user seeing one single glitch (glitch defined as something different from how it works in Office) will run (not walk) to their standard MS Office icons.
How do I know this is true? Simple. There are tons of people who are actually into the OSS movement, love Slashdot, run Linux servers, run OS X, etc. that *still* run MS Office when they can run OpenOffice instead? Why is that? It's because even the most open-minded of us are creatures of habit. And if *these* people are resistant, imagine how the masses are.
Not to me. If you ever get into the infosec theory stuff, you'll study the CIA acronym; the "A" in it stands for availability, and that's what backups provide.
A backup company is a smart addition to a security company.
I suggest trying something in the car stereo or custom rims genre. If that doesn't fly, have a go at a pimp fashion show. In short, if your target is American high school students, topics like science are going to appeal to a very small bunch indeed. You'll find this group in the back of the crowd being made fun of by the other kids - the ones dressed like gansters and whores.
Seriously, good luck with your project. I just think it'd have more success in a country with a better focus on education. Someplace like... anywhere in Europe, or China, or Russia, or Canada, or...
Asking users to learn to create and manage complex passwords is not realistic; user education and/or "awareness" just isn't all that viable. The way the password problem is going to be solved is very simple - they aren't going to be used anymore.
Using SecureID or another similar solution is the "no-brainer" solution that todays users need. This way they don't have to remember anything other than a simple pin - which, luckily, is just about the limit of most peoples' powers in this arena.
I honestly don't think it matters much. I imagine there are a few organizations that it does matter to, but I think those are few and far between.
The most important thing in the market today is experience. Go look on Monster or any of the other sites right now, and you'll see one phrase quite a bit -...or equivalent experience.
In other words, a degree is a bonus now rather than a prerequisite if you have talent and experience. If you have no experience and no big certifications, then a degree is something (and perhaps the degree from a bigger school could help a little), but the jobs available to you in this boat are not all that appealing for the most part anyway.
The great jobs go to those with solid experience, and for those people (and the people hiring them), the degree they have is considered decoration rather than the meat of the resume.
Perhaps this is different in the development field, but I doubt it; I'm coming from the infosec side of things and I imagine things are much the same for programmers.
In short, degrees and certifications are "get you in the door"-oriented credentials; the big jobs rarely go this breed of applicant.
Let me paraphrase you : "I *want* to be enthused, but... someone told me not to be."
While being quite witty, you're missing the point. It's easier to follow the crowd and say Python is the best tool for Bash-oriented tasks. It's harder to admit that while being cooler, it may not be as efficient as Bash.
This is the reality that I knew before reading Linus's comments but only became willing to accept after he did so - hence my post.
In other words, the practice of learning Python will be much like learning French. It's quite nice to know, and learning another language is always a bonus, but perhaps I should spend my time on something more useful given the fact that there is an existing tool (that I am more familiar with) that works as well or better.
...after Linus's comments I am inclined to get more profficient with Bash and C and almost ignore Python completely. It's so dissapointing though - I really wanted to learn Python; it's such a neat language.
Alas, there just isn't that much of a reason for me to since most of what I want to do can be done with Bash. This is a reality I don't want to face.
Certifications like this are often welcome in corporate environments where names and packaging often matter as much or more than the product.
Even if OSS is better in a lot of cases, many managers can't politically afford to introduce it because of the climate that exists in the still largely Windows-controlled world.
Any sort of... anything that lends credibility to OSS is, in my book, a good thing. So if this takes off and acts as some sort of benchmark for quality that people can rely on, I say more power to them.
The problem of course is any editor with an agenda can ruin an article.
The same can be said for any programmer and an open-source project. The collective is there to protect vs. this sort of activity, and in most cases it works like it should.
I hate to plug my own shit but here's my whole take on the Gentoo-bashing stuff. To make a long story short, Linux distros are like punk bands - the hardcore (lame) punk fans only like a band until it makes it big. Once that happens they turn their backs on it and find a less paletable, more obscure group.
Screw em'. Let them be fucktards if they want to. I use Gentoo because it's easy. I'm lazy and it works every time - in a predictable way. The product is great, the forums are great, and if I run any other distro it's because I am in a time crunch or because it's at work and people will only sign off on Redhat. To me, distros boil down to the package managment and the community support. Gentoo excels in both areas.
Don't forget the cars too. Oh well, trial by fire. If it goes horribly wrong, it won't stay that way for long. Either it'll get hardened or another OS'll get the job.
Personally I don't care for Firefox as the rest of the web doesn't really support it and pages don't render correctly. Firefox will not be THE player until the day that people start writing pages that work under Firefox, ignore IE's "quirks", and when they start to understand what spyware is, how to defend against it, and how to get rid of it.
Ok, first off, the notion that the underdog that actually complies with standards is somehow the badguy is completely misguided. It's IE that doesn't conform to the standards, and contrary to many MS'ers, the standards are not measured by who's winning the marketshare battle.
Secondly, install Firefox and use it exclusively on a fresh, patched XP box and then come back and tell me about how the Mozilla team needs to learn more about Spyware.
Unfortunately the whole Google thing is starting to take on an ominous feeling for me. They are cool because they do so few things, and they do them so well. I think we are right on the cusp of them leveling out and heading down hill. I hope I'm wrong though...
> You don't display knowledge with cat knowledge unless knowledge pre-exists.
Exactly. It's a new age "filter knowledge for understanding" concept. As in take all the pre-existing knowledge and try and squeeze the true wisdom from it. It's a bit cheesy, I know, but it's even more lame now that we've obsessed over it so much.:)
The sig is a representation of an idea that doesn't translate perfectly to a command. In other words, it doesn't equate to anything useful when done on an actual machine. That wasn't the goal though - it was to convey the idea itself.
My idea that of gathering and displaying knowledge, and then from that knowledge, pulling the understanding from it. Sort of along the lines of wisdom rather than facts...
Besides, your command is going to functionally do the exact same thing as mine; the one I have now just breaks it into two steps for the purpose of highlighting the concept I laid out above.
At the end of the article (I read it for some reason) the author seems to somewhat agree that open-source code is at least equal with - if not superior to - proprietary code. This seems to fly in the face of his initial statements.
This is a common writing technique -- get a reaction based on title and initial statements, and then bring the real argument later on. Just don't walk away thinking this guy is saying open-source code has worse security overall based on the title; that's not what he said.
Many years from now, when this battle has long died off, I'm going to tell everyone I had a part in this marketshare shift (whether it's true or not at that point will be a non-issue).:)
Here's my proof - my piece on dumping IE that started making its rounds more than 2 weeks before the CERT stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
People need to realize that making a successful Office competitor doesn't equate to making it less "bloated and slow", or adding any sort of all-important feature set.
The only way any product in this space is going to go places is if it works just like Office, acts just like Office, feels just like Office, etc. Office is the standard, and for 99% of people that use it, it's flawless. Any deviation from this standard suite, even if it's an improvement, is nothing but a nuisance to the average user.
A common user seeing one single glitch (glitch defined as something different from how it works in Office) will run (not walk) to their standard MS Office icons.
How do I know this is true? Simple. There are tons of people who are actually into the OSS movement, love Slashdot, run Linux servers, run OS X, etc. that *still* run MS Office when they can run OpenOffice instead? Why is that? It's because even the most open-minded of us are creatures of habit. And if *these* people are resistant, imagine how the masses are.
"Seems like a kind of strange deal to me."
Not to me. If you ever get into the infosec theory stuff, you'll study the CIA acronym; the "A" in it stands for availability, and that's what backups provide.
A backup company is a smart addition to a security company.
I suggest trying something in the car stereo or custom rims genre. If that doesn't fly, have a go at a pimp fashion show. In short, if your target is American high school students, topics like science are going to appeal to a very small bunch indeed. You'll find this group in the back of the crowd being made fun of by the other kids - the ones dressed like gansters and whores.
... anywhere in Europe, or China, or Russia, or Canada, or...
Seriously, good luck with your project. I just think it'd have more success in a country with a better focus on education. Someplace like
Asking users to learn to create and manage complex passwords is not realistic; user education and/or "awareness" just isn't all that viable. The way the password problem is going to be solved is very simple - they aren't going to be used anymore.
Using SecureID or another similar solution is the "no-brainer" solution that todays users need. This way they don't have to remember anything other than a simple pin - which, luckily, is just about the limit of most peoples' powers in this arena.
Dead keys age off the server, and you can even remove keys if you forget the passphrase.
Thank Jesus.
Among the various 'improvements': ability to search by date has been eliminated, as has the ability to deep link to a single post.
Well damn - I hope they don't "improve" it too much more.
I honestly don't think it matters much. I imagine there are a few organizations that it does matter to, but I think those are few and far between.
...or equivalent experience.
The most important thing in the market today is experience. Go look on Monster or any of the other sites right now, and you'll see one phrase quite a bit -
In other words, a degree is a bonus now rather than a prerequisite if you have talent and experience. If you have no experience and no big certifications, then a degree is something (and perhaps the degree from a bigger school could help a little), but the jobs available to you in this boat are not all that appealing for the most part anyway.
The great jobs go to those with solid experience, and for those people (and the people hiring them), the degree they have is considered decoration rather than the meat of the resume.
Perhaps this is different in the development field, but I doubt it; I'm coming from the infosec side of things and I imagine things are much the same for programmers.
In short, degrees and certifications are "get you in the door"-oriented credentials; the big jobs rarely go this breed of applicant.
Let me paraphrase you : "I *want* to be enthused, but ... someone told me not to be."
While being quite witty, you're missing the point. It's easier to follow the crowd and say Python is the best tool for Bash-oriented tasks. It's harder to admit that while being cooler, it may not be as efficient as Bash.
This is the reality that I knew before reading Linus's comments but only became willing to accept after he did so - hence my post.
In other words, the practice of learning Python will be much like learning French. It's quite nice to know, and learning another language is always a bonus, but perhaps I should spend my time on something more useful given the fact that there is an existing tool (that I am more familiar with) that works as well or better.
BTW, why would you want to get more proficient in C? Programmers are abandoning C in droves.
:)
For analyzing exploit code. That's all done in C and Assembler.
...after Linus's comments I am inclined to get more profficient with Bash and C and almost ignore Python completely. It's so dissapointing though - I really wanted to learn Python; it's such a neat language.
Alas, there just isn't that much of a reason for me to since most of what I want to do can be done with Bash. This is a reality I don't want to face.
So was Marina Sirtis as much of a complete hottie as she was on the show? She's what got me into ST; up until I saw her I wasn't much of a fan.
...wasting my every waking moment on WoW...
Certifications like this are often welcome in corporate environments where names and packaging often matter as much or more than the product.
... anything that lends credibility to OSS is, in my book, a good thing. So if this takes off and acts as some sort of benchmark for quality that people can rely on, I say more power to them.
Even if OSS is better in a lot of cases, many managers can't politically afford to introduce it because of the climate that exists in the still largely Windows-controlled world.
Any sort of
"Will Open Source Solaris Kill Linux?"
No.
FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt
e.g.
"I'm not saying Linux is bad or anything, but if you were to use it...you may be sued and lose everything..."
The problem of course is any editor with an agenda can ruin an article.
The same can be said for any programmer and an open-source project. The collective is there to protect vs. this sort of activity, and in most cases it works like it should.
While his comments do have some merit, there is a very good reason why I "believe" in the system.
If you go there right now and research something, it's *very* high quality information.
In short, it's quite easy to see if the system works. Go to the site and check out the various articles; the content is quite good.
I hate to plug my own shit but here's my whole take on the Gentoo-bashing stuff. To make a long story short, Linux distros are like punk bands - the hardcore (lame) punk fans only like a band until it makes it big. Once that happens they turn their backs on it and find a less paletable, more obscure group.
Screw em'. Let them be fucktards if they want to. I use Gentoo because it's easy. I'm lazy and it works every time - in a predictable way. The product is great, the forums are great, and if I run any other distro it's because I am in a time crunch or because it's at work and people will only sign off on Redhat. To me, distros boil down to the package managment and the community support. Gentoo excels in both areas.
Don't forget the cars too. Oh well, trial by fire. If it goes horribly wrong, it won't stay that way for long. Either it'll get hardened or another OS'll get the job.
Ok, first off, the notion that the underdog that actually complies with standards is somehow the badguy is completely misguided. It's IE that doesn't conform to the standards, and contrary to many MS'ers, the standards are not measured by who's winning the marketshare battle.
Secondly, install Firefox and use it exclusively on a fresh, patched XP box and then come back and tell me about how the Mozilla team needs to learn more about Spyware.
Unfortunately the whole Google thing is starting to take on an ominous feeling for me. They are cool because they do so few things, and they do them so well. I think we are right on the cusp of them leveling out and heading down hill. I hope I'm wrong though...
> You don't display knowledge with cat knowledge unless knowledge pre-exists.
:)
Exactly. It's a new age "filter knowledge for understanding" concept. As in take all the pre-existing knowledge and try and squeeze the true wisdom from it. It's a bit cheesy, I know, but it's even more lame now that we've obsessed over it so much.
The sig is a representation of an idea that doesn't translate perfectly to a command. In other words, it doesn't equate to anything useful when done on an actual machine. That wasn't the goal though - it was to convey the idea itself.
My idea that of gathering and displaying knowledge, and then from that knowledge, pulling the understanding from it. Sort of along the lines of wisdom rather than facts...
Besides, your command is going to functionally do the exact same thing as mine; the one I have now just breaks it into two steps for the purpose of highlighting the concept I laid out above.
At the end of the article (I read it for some reason) the author seems to somewhat agree that open-source code is at least equal with - if not superior to - proprietary code. This seems to fly in the face of his initial statements.
This is a common writing technique -- get a reaction based on title and initial statements, and then bring the real argument later on. Just don't walk away thinking this guy is saying open-source code has worse security overall based on the title; that's not what he said.
Many years from now, when this battle has long died off, I'm going to tell everyone I had a part in this marketshare shift (whether it's true or not at that point will be a non-issue). :)
Here's my proof - my piece on dumping IE that started making its rounds more than 2 weeks before the CERT stuff.