Your example involves a VP who is just a mindless sheep. He apparently got promoted to VP because they ran out of space in the mail room.
No, he got promoted to VP because he was energetic in promoting himself, starting initiatives that he can come back with and use to promote himself to his boss. That's the filter that produces upper management in oru society. High-level execs *do* this. Bring in a new CEO, and he'll start a new series of initiatives that he can show some sort of good numbers on.
He reads in a magazine that (imagine this) he can save money by paying people less.
Yup. How do you think large-scale business moves start (laying off middle management, slapping in asset management, moving jobs offshore)? All execs in the world don't get together in a big conference room and hobnob about the latest and greatest. They read publications. Do they run out and implement anything based on that, no feasibility study? Hell, no, just as I pointed out in my post. But that's where they get the idea.
So the employees at his company fudge the numbers to make it look like you can save money by paying people less. Can you believe the gulliblity of this guy?
They don't *lie*, they just focus on positive aspects of the thing.
Fortunately, after he implements the policy, he kicks back and never looks at the balance sheet again.
He's not *worried* about two years down the road, because that's not *relevant* to him. His initiative has succeeded, and he can't be put to blame -- it's the low-level managers hiring overpriced companies that can be blamed.
The pioneering programmers rapidly drive up consulting prices without facing cut-throat competition from the other 1 billion citizens of India.
Look, you can get programming done ass cheaply in the US, too. The reason contracting prices are so high is because *managers will pay it*.
Why do all/. business cases require either the customer or the competition to be as dumb as a post?
There's no stupidity here. It's just that everyone is doing precisely what their company is encouraging them to do. Sometimes those moves aren't what's best for the company as a whole -- this is nothing new or exciting.
It's not the VP being a sheep that's a problem. It's because of the motivations in place.
The VP is primarily interested in pushing through a big project that he can use to promote himself and his further advancement. The low-level managers, upon whom any long-term savings actually rely, are primarily interested in getting their project done within their allotted timeframe.
It's not as if this isn't an existing problem in other fields -- a VP hears from a someone that workplace security is important, so they start a big intiative to do so. The people in the trenches end up bypassing whatever is put in place, because it makes their jobs more difficult. Same goes for disaster preparedness (boy, lot of contractors raking it in on that after 9/11). VP comes up with plan, actual implementation relies on people in the trench, who aren't willing to document everything they do and store it offsite, because it makes their jobs more of a pain in the ass and because it may keep them from finishing within the time constraints placed on them.
What happens in a case like this is that a VP hears or is told by his underlings that his company can save significant amounts of money by shifting jobs overseas. He waits a bit, notices that some competitors have done so successfully. He reads a couple articles in Forbes (always enthusiastic about new trends, as their folks are terrified about missing one). They're from high-level execs from companies that have shown savings preening themselves and trying to build up their personal recognition by talking about what a good move it is.
He gets a group of people at his company to evaluate the possibility of moving jobs overseas. They, knowing that this is a pet project, work damn hard to show that doing so is profitable and hand him back the results. The company then contracts out to some company to assist in transitioning jobs overseas.
Five layers down, a few months later, a bottom level manager is stuck with a mandate that he hire only (for example) Indian workers unless he can show good cause otherwise. He doesn't really care about company money -- as a matter of fact, if he's significantly under budget, his budget for next quarter will be simply cut to match updated expectations. He only cares that the job gets done (the one thing that *will* make his boss tromp on him). He simply finds the company in India with the best reputation, and ignores cost. He doesn't care.
A couple of Indian businesspeople start a company, grab a few Indian folks with a reputation, probably bootstrapping their new (or existing) company with some foreign (American, European) people who are well-known and can give the company an appearance of strong competency.
Prices start out somewhat low, but rapidly rise. The consulting company wants to jack prices as high as possible, and the manager contracting out doesn't care about cost (up to his budget). They hit near-US prices. If managers were worried about cost, US-based contractors wouldn't be paid what they are today.
Moving jobs to India won't have a major long-term improvement in savings.
However, it will move a significant chunk of the world's wealth, which has been very much tied up in the US, over to India. Smart investors can, as always, take advantage of the situation by investing in emerging firms overseas.
This is a good thing for Linux folks, and perhaps somewhat for Mac folks.
RealBASIC has been a popular RAD tool on the Mac for a while. I doubt many folks using Linux are going to want to run out and switch to BASIC, but existing RealBASIC programs should now be easy to port to Linux.
The MSDN search engine is slow and *awful*. Nobody I know that does Windows software development uses it...they use Google with "site:".
Just because someone codes for Windows doesn't mean that they think that all of MS's products are good, and the MSDN search engine is a stinking pile of crap.
If you asked a *person* to find you information relating to the word "apple", I think that said person would take a while before they come up with "washington state apple growers" too. I'd probably go through at least 50 things (actually, I've never heard of Washington State Apple Growers, so I wouldn't) too.
I know a *lot* of people that prefer laptops...I know a lot of people that prefer Ferraris too, though.
Remember that the folks we're talking about are those in developing countries, where funds are tight, though. Pleasure is an afterthought, and getting computing capability to as many people as can be afforded is crucial.
And when compared to someone who just went out and got laid, said developer now has something more than a nice memory -- he's helped a lot of people, has a nice portfolio item, and gotten good experience.
Don't forget about engineering costs (yeah, constant value, but if you're trying to take on the big boys, you're going to start out a lot smaller) and the fact that you're going to need some support circuitry.
More than likely it was "It would be cool for all these countries to have wireless laptops" with absolutely 0 knowledge on the details of such an idea.
I'm still a little dubious as to the actual value of laptops, much less with wireless support.
Such things are very convenient, and certainly popular in offices, but I'm dubious that desktops don't provide much of the same benefit. Sure, some work may get done on the road, but some not (and the increasing availability of Internet access means that companies can decrease travel and save costs). Some work that might not have gotten done otherwise might get done at home, but honestly, most folks don't want to go home and then work more, and I think that most don't actually do that much at home (as an addition to work at work, not as a replacement). You can carry laptops to meetings, but honestly, about half the people where I work just use a notepad (partly because quick sketches are currently easier on paper). You usually aren't transcribing vast amounts of text, just jotting down names or some points to remember. So most of the benefits of laptops seem to be less big than one would thing.
The downsides are significant. Laptops (with the notable exception of hard drives) tend to be less durable than desktops, and tend to get rougher treatment. This tends towards producing shorter lifespans. Laptops are a major target of theft, especially in the developing countries where they want to deploy these. Laptops are more expensive than desktops to produce, and manufacturers are still making higher profit margins on laptops. Most laptop manufacturers are big name (first world) companies, given the far greater engineering work required to put together a laptop. So it makes it harder to keep the funds spent *in* those developing countries when making purchases.
Wireless networking is cute, but it costs a *lot* to deploy the thing all over as opposed to just the offices and conference rooms where you'd put wired Ethernet. If you just slap it in those two places, wired can be more expensive, but installation of wires can be done by local contractors, which keeps funds in country and produces jobs. Most people that I see doing actual work on their laptops tend to work in either meeting rooms or their offices. Usually, this translates to just meaning that they don't have to plug in a cable. Somewhat convenient, but possibly (especially given security and performance issues) not cost-effective. Wireless is still a bit of a luxury item.
This wireless laptop initiative seems more based around what a laptop *company* would like to see happening than what's best for developing countries, IMHO.
The PPC chips in the 601 and 603 days used to use very, very little power. The G4 and the G5 significantly increased power usage. Still not comparable to the highest performance P4s, though, which peak out at about 100 watts.
Business schools have set models and techniques of management that are designed to be generic. You can't sell a product (generic business education) if it doesn't work in all fields. Business schools, IMHO, are a damn waste of time.
Also, if you really want to make "managing" a profession, then the traditional hierarchy-of-power-implies-hierarchy-of-pay model where managers make more money than the people working for them doesn't make sense. It was designed in the days when managers worked their way up from the ranks, and were the most senior and experienced of the rank-and-file. This fixed pay structure (despite the fact that it's much easier to find a business degree than, say, a chemical engineering degree) violates our demand/supply model.
To some extent, the business world has already recognized this, which is why the highly-paid-consultant, the guy who makes more than the manager hiring him, has come to the fore. It's also a shame that this can't be recognized and also applied to regular engineer employees.
Well...I still think that MS is responsible -- for having a lousy security model for years. Also, because devices-aren't-files in Windows, you can't selectively give permission to poke at particular devices to particular users or sgid apps.
Because OS-level support has effectively nothing to do to improve the professional making and distributing PDFs. It's just as easy to create a PDF on Linux or (presumably, don't use it) Windows.
That's like saying "Given that bimaps are the standard for display systems and MS paint has bitmap display at its very core, why the desire to wean people off of it?" It just doesn't make sense.
But it is still possible to create a PDF file that does not allow any manipulation or export...
Yeah. It's also possible to create a road sign that blind people can't use. That doesn't mean that the company that makes the paint is responsible.
Non-discrimination laws vs the blind only apply to some countries (AFAIK USA and -- maybe -- Spain). There is no such law in the country where my friend and I live.
Then neither does the DMCA apply, so why do you *care* about US legalities?
...five years later, I hope I'm not seeing something like the following:
"It doesn't matter that Adobe isn't making Illustrator for Macs any more, because they still make Photoshop, and Freehand's really taken over the market anyway."
In the Bible Belt, one already has to put up with Southern Baptists constantly complaining about the Satanism in Harry Potter. I'm going to love the effects of this.
Bullet time in Max Payne allowed the computer opponents to take more time to aim at you just as well as it allowed you to aim at them, which is why I chose not to use it.
Wait, you're claiming that it makes them more accurate? The AI doesn't need time to calculate aim...or do you mean that it actually deliberately reduces the inserted error?
You're an Apple zealot recommending a Microsoft product?:-)
Seriously, I agree with the "give programmers slow computers" bit. To get the best code, give 'em slower computers with lots of fancy add-ons (multiple monitors, etc) so that you get efficient code that properly supports everything.
I have a friend with a titanium...the case surrounding the LCD is flimsy and isn't stiff enough to support the screen. It's fairly easy to break the screen (which is quite expensive to replace).
Where is it that you live that you can't choose your employer?
If you like Macs and want to work with Macs, get a job in the goddamn Mac division of a company, or work at a Mac software company. Yes, if you're working at a company that produces an AIX debugger, you're probably not going to be doing anything except AIX code unless you switch companies.
Slashdot Mirror
Your example involves a VP who is just a mindless sheep. He apparently got promoted to VP because they ran out of space in the mail room.
/. business cases require either the customer or the competition to be as dumb as a post?
No, he got promoted to VP because he was energetic in promoting himself, starting initiatives that he can come back with and use to promote himself to his boss. That's the filter that produces upper management in oru society. High-level execs *do* this. Bring in a new CEO, and he'll start a new series of initiatives that he can show some sort of good numbers on.
He reads in a magazine that (imagine this) he can save money by paying people less.
Yup. How do you think large-scale business moves start (laying off middle management, slapping in asset management, moving jobs offshore)? All execs in the world don't get together in a big conference room and hobnob about the latest and greatest. They read publications. Do they run out and implement anything based on that, no feasibility study? Hell, no, just as I pointed out in my post. But that's where they get the idea.
So the employees at his company fudge the numbers to make it look like you can save money by paying people less. Can you believe the gulliblity of this guy?
They don't *lie*, they just focus on positive aspects of the thing.
Fortunately, after he implements the policy, he kicks back and never looks at the balance sheet again.
He's not *worried* about two years down the road, because that's not *relevant* to him. His initiative has succeeded, and he can't be put to blame -- it's the low-level managers hiring overpriced companies that can be blamed.
The pioneering programmers rapidly drive up consulting prices without facing cut-throat competition from the other 1 billion citizens of India.
Look, you can get programming done ass cheaply in the US, too. The reason contracting prices are so high is because *managers will pay it*.
Why do all
There's no stupidity here. It's just that everyone is doing precisely what their company is encouraging them to do. Sometimes those moves aren't what's best for the company as a whole -- this is nothing new or exciting.
It's not the VP being a sheep that's a problem. It's because of the motivations in place.
The VP is primarily interested in pushing through a big project that he can use to promote himself and his further advancement. The low-level managers, upon whom any long-term savings actually rely, are primarily interested in getting their project done within their allotted timeframe.
It's not as if this isn't an existing problem in other fields -- a VP hears from a someone that workplace security is important, so they start a big intiative to do so. The people in the trenches end up bypassing whatever is put in place, because it makes their jobs more difficult. Same goes for disaster preparedness (boy, lot of contractors raking it in on that after 9/11). VP comes up with plan, actual implementation relies on people in the trench, who aren't willing to document everything they do and store it offsite, because it makes their jobs more of a pain in the ass and because it may keep them from finishing within the time constraints placed on them.
And get paid $10,000/yr ?
Please.
What happens in a case like this is that a VP hears or is told by his underlings that his company can save significant amounts of money by shifting jobs overseas. He waits a bit, notices that some competitors have done so successfully. He reads a couple articles in Forbes (always enthusiastic about new trends, as their folks are terrified about missing one). They're from high-level execs from companies that have shown savings preening themselves and trying to build up their personal recognition by talking about what a good move it is.
He gets a group of people at his company to evaluate the possibility of moving jobs overseas. They, knowing that this is a pet project, work damn hard to show that doing so is profitable and hand him back the results. The company then contracts out to some company to assist in transitioning jobs overseas.
Five layers down, a few months later, a bottom level manager is stuck with a mandate that he hire only (for example) Indian workers unless he can show good cause otherwise. He doesn't really care about company money -- as a matter of fact, if he's significantly under budget, his budget for next quarter will be simply cut to match updated expectations. He only cares that the job gets done (the one thing that *will* make his boss tromp on him). He simply finds the company in India with the best reputation, and ignores cost. He doesn't care.
A couple of Indian businesspeople start a company, grab a few Indian folks with a reputation, probably bootstrapping their new (or existing) company with some foreign (American, European) people who are well-known and can give the company an appearance of strong competency.
Prices start out somewhat low, but rapidly rise. The consulting company wants to jack prices as high as possible, and the manager contracting out doesn't care about cost (up to his budget). They hit near-US prices. If managers were worried about cost, US-based contractors wouldn't be paid what they are today.
Moving jobs to India won't have a major long-term improvement in savings.
However, it will move a significant chunk of the world's wealth, which has been very much tied up in the US, over to India. Smart investors can, as always, take advantage of the situation by investing in emerging firms overseas.
This is a good thing for Linux folks, and perhaps somewhat for Mac folks.
RealBASIC has been a popular RAD tool on the Mac for a while. I doubt many folks using Linux are going to want to run out and switch to BASIC, but existing RealBASIC programs should now be easy to port to Linux.
The MSDN search engine is slow and *awful*. Nobody I know that does Windows software development uses it...they use Google with "site:".
Just because someone codes for Windows doesn't mean that they think that all of MS's products are good, and the MSDN search engine is a stinking pile of crap.
Doing good synonym matching is pretty non-doable without strong AI. You'd have to understand the *meaning* of the word.
That being said, link analysis tends to let Google do a decent approximation.
If you asked a *person* to find you information relating to the word "apple", I think that said person would take a while before they come up with "washington state apple growers" too. I'd probably go through at least 50 things (actually, I've never heard of Washington State Apple Growers, so I wouldn't) too.
I know a *lot* of people that prefer laptops...I know a lot of people that prefer Ferraris too, though.
Remember that the folks we're talking about are those in developing countries, where funds are tight, though. Pleasure is an afterthought, and getting computing capability to as many people as can be afforded is crucial.
And when compared to someone who just went out and got laid, said developer now has something more than a nice memory -- he's helped a lot of people, has a nice portfolio item, and gotten good experience.
Don't forget about engineering costs (yeah, constant value, but if you're trying to take on the big boys, you're going to start out a lot smaller) and the fact that you're going to need some support circuitry.
More than likely it was "It would be cool for all these countries to have wireless laptops" with absolutely 0 knowledge on the details of such an idea.
I'm still a little dubious as to the actual value of laptops, much less with wireless support.
Such things are very convenient, and certainly popular in offices, but I'm dubious that desktops don't provide much of the same benefit. Sure, some work may get done on the road, but some not (and the increasing availability of Internet access means that companies can decrease travel and save costs). Some work that might not have gotten done otherwise might get done at home, but honestly, most folks don't want to go home and then work more, and I think that most don't actually do that much at home (as an addition to work at work, not as a replacement). You can carry laptops to meetings, but honestly, about half the people where I work just use a notepad (partly because quick sketches are currently easier on paper). You usually aren't transcribing vast amounts of text, just jotting down names or some points to remember. So most of the benefits of laptops seem to be less big than one would thing.
The downsides are significant. Laptops (with the notable exception of hard drives) tend to be less durable than desktops, and tend to get rougher treatment. This tends towards producing shorter lifespans. Laptops are a major target of theft, especially in the developing countries where they want to deploy these. Laptops are more expensive than desktops to produce, and manufacturers are still making higher profit margins on laptops. Most laptop manufacturers are big name (first world) companies, given the far greater engineering work required to put together a laptop. So it makes it harder to keep the funds spent *in* those developing countries when making purchases.
Wireless networking is cute, but it costs a *lot* to deploy the thing all over as opposed to just the offices and conference rooms where you'd put wired Ethernet. If you just slap it in those two places, wired can be more expensive, but installation of wires can be done by local contractors, which keeps funds in country and produces jobs. Most people that I see doing actual work on their laptops tend to work in either meeting rooms or their offices. Usually, this translates to just meaning that they don't have to plug in a cable. Somewhat convenient, but possibly (especially given security and performance issues) not cost-effective. Wireless is still a bit of a luxury item.
This wireless laptop initiative seems more based around what a laptop *company* would like to see happening than what's best for developing countries, IMHO.
The PPC chips in the 601 and 603 days used to use very, very little power. The G4 and the G5 significantly increased power usage. Still not comparable to the highest performance P4s, though, which peak out at about 100 watts.
AP's shouldn't die the way they are on you. Could be a power problem (wiring?) or maybe humidity or temperature.
If you have a UPS, you could try plugging your AP into it to smooth things out a bit.
I'm not sure what the iron fist would choose for women, but I think my point is clear.
There are women in engineering?
I must be working at the wrong place.
Business schools have set models and techniques of management that are designed to be generic. You can't sell a product (generic business education) if it doesn't work in all fields. Business schools, IMHO, are a damn waste of time.
Also, if you really want to make "managing" a profession, then the traditional hierarchy-of-power-implies-hierarchy-of-pay model where managers make more money than the people working for them doesn't make sense. It was designed in the days when managers worked their way up from the ranks, and were the most senior and experienced of the rank-and-file. This fixed pay structure (despite the fact that it's much easier to find a business degree than, say, a chemical engineering degree) violates our demand/supply model.
To some extent, the business world has already recognized this, which is why the highly-paid-consultant, the guy who makes more than the manager hiring him, has come to the fore. It's also a shame that this can't be recognized and also applied to regular engineer employees.
Well...I still think that MS is responsible -- for having a lousy security model for years. Also, because devices-aren't-files in Windows, you can't selectively give permission to poke at particular devices to particular users or sgid apps.
Because OS-level support has effectively nothing to do to improve the professional making and distributing PDFs. It's just as easy to create a PDF on Linux or (presumably, don't use it) Windows.
That's like saying "Given that bimaps are the standard for display systems and MS paint has bitmap display at its very core, why the desire to wean people off of it?" It just doesn't make sense.
But it is still possible to create a PDF file that does not allow any manipulation or export...
Yeah. It's also possible to create a road sign that blind people can't use. That doesn't mean that the company that makes the paint is responsible.
Non-discrimination laws vs the blind only apply to some countries (AFAIK USA and -- maybe -- Spain). There is no such law in the country where my friend and I live.
Then neither does the DMCA apply, so why do you *care* about US legalities?
...five years later, I hope I'm not seeing something like the following:
"It doesn't matter that Adobe isn't making Illustrator for Macs any more, because they still make Photoshop, and Freehand's really taken over the market anyway."
Nothing preventing OSS in the US from relying on the DMCA. I mean, I don't see it happening, but from a legal perspective, it could.
In the Bible Belt, one already has to put up with Southern Baptists constantly complaining about the Satanism in Harry Potter. I'm going to love the effects of this.
Bullet time in Max Payne allowed the computer opponents to take more time to aim at you just as well as it allowed you to aim at them, which is why I chose not to use it.
Wait, you're claiming that it makes them more accurate? The AI doesn't need time to calculate aim...or do you mean that it actually deliberately reduces the inserted error?
You're an Apple zealot recommending a Microsoft product? :-)
Seriously, I agree with the "give programmers slow computers" bit. To get the best code, give 'em slower computers with lots of fancy add-ons (multiple monitors, etc) so that you get efficient code that properly supports everything.
I have a friend with a titanium...the case surrounding the LCD is flimsy and isn't stiff enough to support the screen. It's fairly easy to break the screen (which is quite expensive to replace).
Where is it that you live that you can't choose your employer?
If you like Macs and want to work with Macs, get a job in the goddamn Mac division of a company, or work at a Mac software company. Yes, if you're working at a company that produces an AIX debugger, you're probably not going to be doing anything except AIX code unless you switch companies.