This, along with the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, etc., etc., are nothing more than big business. When players are bought and sold, the "team" with the most money normally wins. I'm very much in favor of seeing elite competition, but all of the chest thumping by teams like this is meaningless.
I don't think the Onion originated that. Though they may have co opted and slightly modified this from back in the mid 80s. But then, there may be predecessors to that as well.
"Welcome to Lake Wobegon, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average." - Garrison Keillor
DING, DING, DING! Congratulations, you've won the prize for dumbest post of the week! You win access to google, and the ability to research and post a retraction to your idiotic commentary. But, that will in no way diminish the glory of your achievement.
Different markets. RIM didn't go after the consumer market, and that was a mistake. Business people wanted email, consumers wanted Youtube & Facebook. RIM made other mistakes as well that caused it to fail, but that doesn't mean there's no market for a keyboard.
Quality "moving parts" keyboards have been around for ages, and I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that they fail less frequently than those touch screens get cracked. I learned to touch type (70+ wpm) about forty years ago, and while it's fine and dandy to type out longer messages like this at my computer. I'm frequently in meetings, on travel, or other areas where I don't have access to it, and need to get a response to someone quickly. Ideally for me, a mixture between the keyboard I had on my old Blackberry, and the smartphone features I've had for the last couple years on my iPhone would be a perfect world.
When were consumers given the choice? Yes, I agree we want thinner phones...I hate having to carry my company phone (iPhone 4s with an Otter case...measures nearly 3/4 inches thick!) around in my dress pants pocket. It's uncomfortable, and looks stupid. I've used it for nearly two years, and love the smartphone features, but severely miss the hardware keyboard of our old Crackberries, along with the little belt clip case...I could pull it out, and start typing before I even looked at the screen. Call me old, I am 55, but many of my coworkers have expressed the same sentiment.
And there's still a decent market for horses, and you can buy them. On the other hand, you can't buy a smartphone with a hardware keyboard at any Verizon, T-Mobil, etc. store, and there is clearly still a market for them. But, it's likely not as profitable (I'm guessing here) as the smartphones, and so those companies want that option to die away.
You don't need a survey of 10k to tell you that there's a market for something. It only needs to answer the question of if it's a large enough market to make production of the device profitable.
Well, I'm just going to add my own informal survey data. My company switched us from Crackberries to iPhones a couple years ago. While most all of us love the smartphone aspect, the vast majority of folks miss the old hardware keyboards. I had much fewer typing errors on the RIM products.
You're reading too much into his post. Where the fuck did he try to "prove" anything? He simply posted an observation. Nowhere did he claim that his observation was proof of causation. Don't you think most Slashdotters are intelligent enough to realize that?
I think that most Slashdotters would assume that he's implying the causation. Otherwise, there's no point in posting the anecdote...it's simply another data point.
Having pretty much been through the same thing...raised by a smoking mom and grandparents, working with smokers until it was banned in our offices in the 80s, etc., etc....I can relate. That said, I'll never support a ban. Why? Because just like anything else you're told you can't have, it encourages people who want to rebel (typically teenagers). And, because I'm typically not in favor of telling someone what they can or cannot do, as long as they're not affecting someone else. Obviously, this would mean that they'd need to be responsible for all the added expense of places to smoke away from everyone else, added insurance expenses, etc.
Different times, and different ways of thinking. It's easy to judge in retrospect, and a little difficult to imagine a time when it was okay to skin those rabbits for a fur coat, and nobody would complain about it.
4 levels? How many direct reports do you expect one manager to effectively handle? I'm at the 3rd level in my organization (we've varied between 80-120k employees over the last dozen years) with 5 direct reports, and and additional 58 below them at several locations in different timezones. And yet, I'm still 5 levels below our division president...not even the CEO.
I'm sure you could tell me how my time could be used more effectively managing many more people. I'm looking forward to your reference to where you've successfully implemented this strategy.
Because it's not required for the employee to read the policy in order for them to be held accountable for it. The policy is in place to protect the company from liability, and allow them to get rid of people.
I work for a large multinational with a presence in all states. Our policies are updated nearly daily as rules change, and due to the fact that laws are different in nearly every location. Nobody reads them all, nor do they have to. But, like it or not, you're still responsible to follow them.
There are plenty of things that you can get sued over that are not illegal. For example, a lot of things can be said between two private individuals, and it's simply freedom of speech, with no legal recourse. Saying those same things could be harassment in the workplace. So yes, policies do need to spell out things, and even this varies from state to state, typically with fewer requirements in "right to work" states since you can be fired just because it's Tuesday.
Slashdot Mirror
This, along with the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, etc., etc., are nothing more than big business. When players are bought and sold, the "team" with the most money normally wins. I'm very much in favor of seeing elite competition, but all of the chest thumping by teams like this is meaningless.
I don't think the Onion originated that. Though they may have co opted and slightly modified this from back in the mid 80s. But then, there may be predecessors to that as well.
"Welcome to Lake Wobegon, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average." - Garrison Keillor
Intelligence != Wisdom
DING, DING, DING! Congratulations, you've won the prize for dumbest post of the week! You win access to google, and the ability to research and post a retraction to your idiotic commentary. But, that will in no way diminish the glory of your achievement.
Get the fuck off my lawn. Enough people found it interesting enough to state their opinion. Who the fuck are you to tell them otherwise, jackass.
Different markets. RIM didn't go after the consumer market, and that was a mistake. Business people wanted email, consumers wanted Youtube & Facebook. RIM made other mistakes as well that caused it to fail, but that doesn't mean there's no market for a keyboard.
Honestly, your situation doesn't apply to mine. Don't pretend to know how everyone should/shouldn't be "doing it".
Bravo! You stated it much better than I have.
You do realize that they didn't fail because of the keyboard, right?
Because several hundred people found it interesting enough to read and respond to. Including you.
Quality "moving parts" keyboards have been around for ages, and I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that they fail less frequently than those touch screens get cracked. I learned to touch type (70+ wpm) about forty years ago, and while it's fine and dandy to type out longer messages like this at my computer. I'm frequently in meetings, on travel, or other areas where I don't have access to it, and need to get a response to someone quickly. Ideally for me, a mixture between the keyboard I had on my old Blackberry, and the smartphone features I've had for the last couple years on my iPhone would be a perfect world.
You obviously do care, or you wouldn't have taken to the time to troll your response.
When were consumers given the choice? Yes, I agree we want thinner phones...I hate having to carry my company phone (iPhone 4s with an Otter case...measures nearly 3/4 inches thick!) around in my dress pants pocket. It's uncomfortable, and looks stupid. I've used it for nearly two years, and love the smartphone features, but severely miss the hardware keyboard of our old Crackberries, along with the little belt clip case...I could pull it out, and start typing before I even looked at the screen. Call me old, I am 55, but many of my coworkers have expressed the same sentiment.
And there's still a decent market for horses, and you can buy them. On the other hand, you can't buy a smartphone with a hardware keyboard at any Verizon, T-Mobil, etc. store, and there is clearly still a market for them. But, it's likely not as profitable (I'm guessing here) as the smartphones, and so those companies want that option to die away.
Old people buy phones too jackass. And, I'd be willing to bet that I can type faster on a typewriter than you can on your smarterThanYouPhone.
Now get the fuck off of my lawn!
You don't need a survey of 10k to tell you that there's a market for something. It only needs to answer the question of if it's a large enough market to make production of the device profitable.
Well, I'm just going to add my own informal survey data. My company switched us from Crackberries to iPhones a couple years ago. While most all of us love the smartphone aspect, the vast majority of folks miss the old hardware keyboards. I had much fewer typing errors on the RIM products.
You're reading too much into his post. Where the fuck did he try to "prove" anything? He simply posted an observation. Nowhere did he claim that his observation was proof of causation. Don't you think most Slashdotters are intelligent enough to realize that?
I think that most Slashdotters would assume that he's implying the causation. Otherwise, there's no point in posting the anecdote...it's simply another data point.
Having pretty much been through the same thing...raised by a smoking mom and grandparents, working with smokers until it was banned in our offices in the 80s, etc., etc....I can relate. That said, I'll never support a ban. Why? Because just like anything else you're told you can't have, it encourages people who want to rebel (typically teenagers). And, because I'm typically not in favor of telling someone what they can or cannot do, as long as they're not affecting someone else. Obviously, this would mean that they'd need to be responsible for all the added expense of places to smoke away from everyone else, added insurance expenses, etc.
that's barbaric.
Different times, and different ways of thinking. It's easy to judge in retrospect, and a little difficult to imagine a time when it was okay to skin those rabbits for a fur coat, and nobody would complain about it.
Okay, I'm calling bullshit. Please link to any scientific evidence that it's possible to become addicted via second hand smoke.
Your anecdote, and mine which is quite the opposite (raised and lived, and worked with smokers), really don't mean much.
4 levels? How many direct reports do you expect one manager to effectively handle? I'm at the 3rd level in my organization (we've varied between 80-120k employees over the last dozen years) with 5 direct reports, and and additional 58 below them at several locations in different timezones. And yet, I'm still 5 levels below our division president...not even the CEO.
I'm sure you could tell me how my time could be used more effectively managing many more people. I'm looking forward to your reference to where you've successfully implemented this strategy.
And that's exactly why we pay our corporate lawyers to cover our corporate arses.
Because it's not required for the employee to read the policy in order for them to be held accountable for it. The policy is in place to protect the company from liability, and allow them to get rid of people.
I work for a large multinational with a presence in all states. Our policies are updated nearly daily as rules change, and due to the fact that laws are different in nearly every location. Nobody reads them all, nor do they have to. But, like it or not, you're still responsible to follow them.
There are plenty of things that you can get sued over that are not illegal. For example, a lot of things can be said between two private individuals, and it's simply freedom of speech, with no legal recourse. Saying those same things could be harassment in the workplace. So yes, policies do need to spell out things, and even this varies from state to state, typically with fewer requirements in "right to work" states since you can be fired just because it's Tuesday.