Not everything is about Math. Employees will feel more rewarded by a company supplied meal than they would with the equivalent (or substantially more) cash. Especially if the boss has stayed and joins in the meal too.
Equally, pick the wrong perk and do it in the wrong way and it'll be a demotivation. I was once given an envelope of vouchers with the entire office gathered around as if I was employee of the month. Ack. I left that place soon after.
However, with the government standing in the middle between your and your employer, you will never get a larger paycheck equal to the perks.
It's not just that, but the company is getting them in bulk at wholesale. Whilst individuals could do that, most won't and they'll pay retail. Then add the fact that the company is supplying a fridge and doing the stocking for you for convenience.
Even if it were an either perks OR the money situation the perks would make more sense. But it tends not to be. Employers that value their employees enough to give them the perks tend to pay more.
Ask for the beverage you want. It's supposed to be there as a perk, not something they have to supply through gritted teeth. If they don't want to supply the beverage you want, well that's almost as much of a signal as removing them altogether.
Linux is a kernel. Then there's a whole load of software stacked on top from GNU and others, then one of several desktop UIs. That makes for a distribution. Each distribution being different.
When (ab)using the word Linux to mean the whole caboodle, it's clearly covering a family of OSs rather than a single OS.... If we're being consistent with you saying OSX isn't NeXTSTEP.
As to Windows, absolutely it used to be a desktop environment on top of DOS. Became a self contained OS with Win95. And had the different architecture of NT merged in along the way. And yet you're pretty much on your own if you say it's a different OS.
There's no right or wrong answer on any of this. Different platforms have their own standards for what constitutes a distinct OS, rather than a new version or variant of an existing one.
But I think OSX has a pretty good claim for being the recent releases of NeXTSTEP.
Face it, you overreached in trying to make working on OSS look like a good option. You have to do it for love, because the chances of getting money for it are tiny. And if you're a beginner getting in now rather than early, non-existant. Like a Ponzi scheme.
It is arguable whether NEXTSTEP can be called the same as OS-X
Is Ubuntu still Ubuntu when they've changed various components. Such as from Gnome to Unity?
But Display Postscript has been completely replaced by Quartz
Right, but even there, they've essentially upgraded from a Display Postscript engine to a PDF engine.
the UI, which lives on in GNUSTEP, is certainly not the same as Aqua
Were both Windows 3 and Windows Vista both Windows? Stuff has been added along the way, like a taskbar and a start button. But it's still Windows.
Today's Cocoa is the AppKit and FrameWork APIs that go all the way back to NeXTSTEP or at least OPENSTEP if you want to be picky. The same patterns are used, the same classes. Even the same NS prefix used on all the same basic classes, permanently marking it's heritage. The same Interface Builder is used, though a few years ago it was embedded in XCode. For sure it got a makeover to make it look more like the Mac OS line, but it's still just 25 years of development, not something different.
BeOS too, had it survived would look different now. The rectangular embossed grey look was a 1990s thing.
Because if you think they do you sir do not understand the basics here. They do not pay taxes, never have, never will. Any and all taxes assessed against them are and will be paid by their customers.
Fuck me. You don't really believe that do you? OK here's what happens a company earns money from doing business. That money does of course come from their customers. But once it's been earned it belongs to the company. And they pay (or at least should pay) tax out of that money that they own.
Now then, using your argument, one would also have to say that employees don't pay tax, their employers do. Yet employers are companies and employees are customers.
The solution is to reduce government spending, and thus the total tax burden.
My question, which you couldn't answer, included the proviso that the tax could be at whatever level. Unless you're advocating an anarchy there will always be tax, and the problem of multi-nationals cheating everybody by not paying their share.
This backlash was because coders know what a regression is, and UX designers do not.
Of course they do. This kind of condescension to fellow professionals IN THEIR SPECIALIST FIELD is exactly what I'm talking about. You illustrate the problem perfectly.
Regressions in code is your field. Regressions in UX is theirs.
The problem is that you make the mistake of thinking that features should only be added, not taken away. That doesn't even follow for code, let alone UIs. You haven't been coding long if you haven't seen plenty of APIs calls go from current to deprecated to unsupported to gone.
And why? Either because a piece of functionality is no longer needed. Or because someone came up with a better way. Am I talking about code or UI? Both!
Actually, looking at your username, are you even a coder?
Strange conclusion. BeOS and NeXT both had professional UX experts but weren't successful on the desktop.
NeXTSTEP is the second most popular desktop OS in the world right now. As everyone who programs in Cocoa is constantly reminded. For sure it's had a change of name and a change of owner. And it has of course progressed a lot in it's 25 year history. But it's still the same NeXTSTEP.
For sure it's a shame BeOS died. And it was indeed due to a succession of bad business models rather then anything to do UX. I'd have a lot more enthusiasm for the OSS movement if they'd concentrated their efforts on Haiku rather than Linux.
Do you think the multinationals should pay their share of tax or not? Or do you believe that tax burden (at whatever level it is set) should be born by small-businesses and individuals, whilst the multinationals pay next to nothing?
Well, ARM clearly does hire graduates straight from university, here:
a) ARM doe an awful lot of things that are not OSS. They are a chip design company.
b) Being a graduate from university does not say that you haven't been contributing to OSS for free for years. In fact quite a lot of OSS work is done by students.
So, pics or it didn't happen. I mean FFS, if there's so much evidence of OSS jobs going to OSS newbs then find some and show me. It can't be that hard if it's as common as you claim.
This represents a serious change in Apple's direction.
This is a Defense Department announcement, not an Apple one. There's nothing to indicate Apple have done anything, other than sell iPhones and enterprise licenses to all comers.
Apple might have done more, but there's no indication here. And there's certainly not any sign of a serious change of direction. Those enterprise licenses for iOS have been around for years, allowing enterprise customers to install their own apps and have control of their iPhones, without going anywhere near the iTunes App Store.
Sure they don't do enterprise servers for OSX any more. But that's a whole different story.
I'm with you drinkypoo. I was a great fan of Elite back in the day. And actually believed there were economic consequences to what I chose to buy. And that there were missions to go on, meteor storms to find, and something exciting in the other galaxies, if only I could get the powerup I needed to get there.
(On my version (BBC cassette) there were none of these things. Only there was no way of knowing that in those pre-www days.)
One's imagination and hopefulness filled in the gaps.
But we're older, wiser and have experienced more sophisticated games since then. I feel sure there is a good game to be made in this genre, but neither David Braben nor the community efforts have succeeded in the last 30 years. Who knows maybe Braben's up-coming remake will hit the mark. Never say never.
Right. So that's an example of what I was describing of people doing years of unpaid work on OSS before they get a paid one.
Suppose people who wanted to work on Windows had to spend years of unpaid work contributing code to Windows before Microsoft would give them a paid job. There'd rightly be an uproar! They'd be called all kinds of evil. Not praised for at least paying a small minority of their programmers.
You also implicitly point out that won't happen with OSS jobs. If you get employed by IBM, ARM, RedHat, heck even Oracle's open teams they will pay you from day 1 to work on open projects.
You are saying that someone who hasn't already had years working on an OSS project will get a paid job with one of those companies.
BasilBrush: Not only will they treat you more politely than an OSS project, they'll pay you.
You're claim that OSS projects won't pay you.
English comprehension and logic aren't your strong points then. My sentence points out that a job will pay you. Implicit is that they'll pay you from day one. It doesn't say that there are no paid jobs that are doing OSS projects.
The fact is this is about newcomers to an OSS project being treated badly by those in the clique. Those in the clique might have paid jobs doing the OOS project. Those who are new would take years to get there, but more likely never will. The vast majority doing this stuff being unpaid. Those that are, mostly got in to the project early. And they aren't going to step aside to make room. Anyone going in to OSS thinking they're going to be paid eventually might just as well join a Ponzi scheme.
But no matter how many people tell you they were badly treated by an OSS project, you're going to call them liars. Insisting that they give up their slashdot anonymity to give you examples
And why? Because you are one of the established OSS people that does the abuse of newcomers. And you're doing it again right here.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not past tense. The readers are still there.
Not everything is about Math. Employees will feel more rewarded by a company supplied meal than they would with the equivalent (or substantially more) cash. Especially if the boss has stayed and joins in the meal too.
Equally, pick the wrong perk and do it in the wrong way and it'll be a demotivation. I was once given an envelope of vouchers with the entire office gathered around as if I was employee of the month. Ack. I left that place soon after.
However, with the government standing in the middle between your and your employer, you will never get a larger paycheck equal to the perks.
It's not just that, but the company is getting them in bulk at wholesale. Whilst individuals could do that, most won't and they'll pay retail. Then add the fact that the company is supplying a fridge and doing the stocking for you for convenience.
Even if it were an either perks OR the money situation the perks would make more sense. But it tends not to be. Employers that value their employees enough to give them the perks tend to pay more.
Ask for the beverage you want. It's supposed to be there as a perk, not something they have to supply through gritted teeth. If they don't want to supply the beverage you want, well that's almost as much of a signal as removing them altogether.
Cutting the sodas isn't going to make much difference to your paycheck.
It has a fair chance of lowering morale though.
In the case of Ubuntu, the OS is Linux
Linux is a kernel. Then there's a whole load of software stacked on top from GNU and others, then one of several desktop UIs. That makes for a distribution. Each distribution being different.
When (ab)using the word Linux to mean the whole caboodle, it's clearly covering a family of OSs rather than a single OS.... If we're being consistent with you saying OSX isn't NeXTSTEP.
As to Windows, absolutely it used to be a desktop environment on top of DOS. Became a self contained OS with Win95. And had the different architecture of NT merged in along the way. And yet you're pretty much on your own if you say it's a different OS.
There's no right or wrong answer on any of this. Different platforms have their own standards for what constitutes a distinct OS, rather than a new version or variant of an existing one.
But I think OSX has a pretty good claim for being the recent releases of NeXTSTEP.
Face it, you overreached in trying to make working on OSS look like a good option. You have to do it for love, because the chances of getting money for it are tiny. And if you're a beginner getting in now rather than early, non-existant. Like a Ponzi scheme.
It is arguable whether NEXTSTEP can be called the same as OS-X
Is Ubuntu still Ubuntu when they've changed various components. Such as from Gnome to Unity?
But Display Postscript has been completely replaced by Quartz
Right, but even there, they've essentially upgraded from a Display Postscript engine to a PDF engine.
the UI, which lives on in GNUSTEP, is certainly not the same as Aqua
Were both Windows 3 and Windows Vista both Windows? Stuff has been added along the way, like a taskbar and a start button. But it's still Windows.
Today's Cocoa is the AppKit and FrameWork APIs that go all the way back to NeXTSTEP or at least OPENSTEP if you want to be picky. The same patterns are used, the same classes. Even the same NS prefix used on all the same basic classes, permanently marking it's heritage. The same Interface Builder is used, though a few years ago it was embedded in XCode. For sure it got a makeover to make it look more like the Mac OS line, but it's still just 25 years of development, not something different.
BeOS too, had it survived would look different now. The rectangular embossed grey look was a 1990s thing.
It's a shame you can't follow the flow of a simple discussion.
It's as true are "black is white" and "the moon is made of cream cheese". In other words there's no arguing with someone who rejects reality.
If you had a nationalised health service, supplied to all paid through general taxation, you wouldn't be having that problem.
Because if you think they do you sir do not understand the basics here. They do not pay taxes, never have, never will. Any and all taxes assessed against them are and will be paid by their customers.
Fuck me. You don't really believe that do you? OK here's what happens a company earns money from doing business. That money does of course come from their customers. But once it's been earned it belongs to the company. And they pay (or at least should pay) tax out of that money that they own.
Now then, using your argument, one would also have to say that employees don't pay tax, their employers do. Yet employers are companies and employees are customers.
Here's a graphical representation of why your argument is stupid.
http://bumblr.blogspot.co.uk/2009/04/snake-eating-its-tail-funny-pic.html
The solution is to reduce government spending, and thus the total tax burden.
My question, which you couldn't answer, included the proviso that the tax could be at whatever level. Unless you're advocating an anarchy there will always be tax, and the problem of multi-nationals cheating everybody by not paying their share.
This backlash was because coders know what a regression is, and UX designers do not.
Of course they do. This kind of condescension to fellow professionals IN THEIR SPECIALIST FIELD is exactly what I'm talking about. You illustrate the problem perfectly.
Regressions in code is your field. Regressions in UX is theirs.
The problem is that you make the mistake of thinking that features should only be added, not taken away. That doesn't even follow for code, let alone UIs. You haven't been coding long if you haven't seen plenty of APIs calls go from current to deprecated to unsupported to gone.
And why? Either because a piece of functionality is no longer needed. Or because someone came up with a better way. Am I talking about code or UI? Both!
Actually, looking at your username, are you even a coder?
Strange conclusion. BeOS and NeXT both had professional UX experts but weren't successful on the desktop.
NeXTSTEP is the second most popular desktop OS in the world right now. As everyone who programs in Cocoa is constantly reminded. For sure it's had a change of name and a change of owner. And it has of course progressed a lot in it's 25 year history. But it's still the same NeXTSTEP.
For sure it's a shame BeOS died. And it was indeed due to a succession of bad business models rather then anything to do UX. I'd have a lot more enthusiasm for the OSS movement if they'd concentrated their efforts on Haiku rather than Linux.
Do you think the multinationals should pay their share of tax or not? Or do you believe that tax burden (at whatever level it is set) should be born by small-businesses and individuals, whilst the multinationals pay next to nothing?
Well if you want to count university as years of unpaid work then go ahead.
See the difference in pay between interning for a commercial software company and an OSS project.
I invited that from you first, so: after you.
You say that now. After your attempt to find any evidence for your claim failed.
Well, ARM clearly does hire graduates straight from university, here:
a) ARM doe an awful lot of things that are not OSS. They are a chip design company.
b) Being a graduate from university does not say that you haven't been contributing to OSS for free for years. In fact quite a lot of OSS work is done by students.
So, pics or it didn't happen. I mean FFS, if there's so much evidence of OSS jobs going to OSS newbs then find some and show me. It can't be that hard if it's as common as you claim.
This represents a serious change in Apple's direction.
This is a Defense Department announcement, not an Apple one. There's nothing to indicate Apple have done anything, other than sell iPhones and enterprise licenses to all comers.
Apple might have done more, but there's no indication here. And there's certainly not any sign of a serious change of direction. Those enterprise licenses for iOS have been around for years, allowing enterprise customers to install their own apps and have control of their iPhones, without going anywhere near the iTunes App Store.
Sure they don't do enterprise servers for OSX any more. But that's a whole different story.
Stock price is an indicator of how much a company is expanding.
No, only it's financial results that tell you that. Stock price variations tell you nothing more than investor sentiment.
There's a peace symbol on Apple's website? Where?
I'm with you drinkypoo. I was a great fan of Elite back in the day. And actually believed there were economic consequences to what I chose to buy. And that there were missions to go on, meteor storms to find, and something exciting in the other galaxies, if only I could get the powerup I needed to get there.
(On my version (BBC cassette) there were none of these things. Only there was no way of knowing that in those pre-www days.)
One's imagination and hopefulness filled in the gaps.
But we're older, wiser and have experienced more sophisticated games since then. I feel sure there is a good game to be made in this genre, but neither David Braben nor the community efforts have succeeded in the last 30 years. Who knows maybe Braben's up-coming remake will hit the mark. Never say never.
Right. So that's an example of what I was describing of people doing years of unpaid work on OSS before they get a paid one.
Suppose people who wanted to work on Windows had to spend years of unpaid work contributing code to Windows before Microsoft would give them a paid job. There'd rightly be an uproar! They'd be called all kinds of evil. Not praised for at least paying a small minority of their programmers.
You also implicitly point out that won't happen with OSS jobs. If you get employed by IBM, ARM, RedHat, heck even Oracle's open teams they will pay you from day 1 to work on open projects.
You are saying that someone who hasn't already had years working on an OSS project will get a paid job with one of those companies.
Pics or it didn't happen.
Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha. You're screwed.
BasilBrush: Not only will they treat you more politely than an OSS project, they'll pay you.
You're claim that OSS projects won't pay you.
English comprehension and logic aren't your strong points then. My sentence points out that a job will pay you. Implicit is that they'll pay you from day one. It doesn't say that there are no paid jobs that are doing OSS projects.
The fact is this is about newcomers to an OSS project being treated badly by those in the clique. Those in the clique might have paid jobs doing the OOS project. Those who are new would take years to get there, but more likely never will. The vast majority doing this stuff being unpaid. Those that are, mostly got in to the project early. And they aren't going to step aside to make room. Anyone going in to OSS thinking they're going to be paid eventually might just as well join a Ponzi scheme.
But no matter how many people tell you they were badly treated by an OSS project, you're going to call them liars. Insisting that they give up their slashdot anonymity to give you examples
And why? Because you are one of the established OSS people that does the abuse of newcomers. And you're doing it again right here.