The problem with Office 2003 right now is that, even though Office 2003 is a great substitute and can use Office files...it CANT use Office 2007 files.
There. Fixed that for you. You should be aware that OO and O2K3 are in pretty much the same boat. The fact that MS makes a 'converter' is besides the point; why should people go to the hassle of downloading, installing, and using the converter just to enable anti-social behavior by the small minority of Office 2007 users?
Actually, Office 2003 and XP can read the new Office 2007 file formats natively with a free add-in. In fact, 2003 will even go find the add-in when you try to load a docx for the first time. No converter necessary.
Of course it was. Microsoft has released SPs for all of their large pieces of software in recent history. It would be completely stupid to pretend that one wasn't going to come out for Vista. Hence, the planning.
I don't think most slashdot readers understand how difficult it is to stabilize such a large, complex piece of software like Windows. It's just not possible to hold a release until "all the bugs are fixed" if you ever want it to be released.
From MS's point of view anyway. Just remember what MS is trying to achieve. They are not after perfection, they are just after having something that is good enough to make a sale. It does not have to work 100%.
Any serious software project cannot achieve 100% perfection. There's simply always another feature to add or a bug to fix. It's even more true for products like Windows which are so exceedingly complex that even small changes can be destabilizing. At a certain point, you have to choose keeping the bugs you know over those you don't know. You have to cut features you'd like to have but don't have time to code, test, document, etc.
You're right--it's very easy to contract HPV. A common figure bandied about is 75-90% of sexually active adults will acquire the virus at some point in their lifetime.
Actually, a lot of lawyers do still use WordPerfect. Apparently, there have even been judges who rejected legal documents presented in Word format, demanding WordPerfect instead. I've been told the reason for this is that WordPerfect has historically had better document comparison features (how are these two contracts different? what clauses were changed in this version?)
You should really read the article I linked. From the intro,
But, as we look to the horizon of a decade hence, we see no silver bullet. There is no single development, in either technology or in management technique, that by itself promises even one order-of-magnitude improvement in productivity, in reliability, in simplicity. In this article, I shall try to show why, by examining both the nature of the software problem and the properties of the bullets proposed.
There are many prominent employers that do focus on looking for smart people with a strong aptitude for programming and worry less about skill lists and certs. I've certainly interviewed and worked for companies like that (including my current employer) and been unable to get past the HR screen for others.
While my salary is nothing to sneeze at, it's nothing compared to the 60-70k number people seemed to like to throw around during the bubble.
Competitive salaries for entry level software developers are in and above that range (depending on where you're located geographically) right now. In fact, the starting salaries at a lot of companies are better now than they were during the bubble because stock options are in practice making up a lot less of employees' compensation these days.
The fact of the matter is that the market is not oversaturated right now, at least not for entry level positions. The bust in students wanting to do Computer Science that hit a few years ago is now working its way to graduation time. With the economy picking up, there is a growing shortage of qualified candidates. The best and the brightest graduating in the next few years have a lot of very good options for internships right and for full time positions when they finish in a couple years.
A mixture of CDMA and GSM as opposed to pure GSM plus a cell phone market where all companies lock the phones you buy to only work with that carrier. Fortunately, the laws just changed (I believe by a court ruling) such that having a third part unlock your phone for you is now completely legal.
The reason Estonia advanced its cellular technology so fast was because the existing Soviet era landline system was a mess and inadequate for the communication needs of the country. People had been on waiting lists for phones for years. When further investment in the infrastructure was available, cellphones were already on the scene so it made sense to focus there instead of on an outdated system.
Market driven mass transit has been successful nowhere.
That's not necessarily true. Before WWII, there was quite a lot of successful privately run and funded mass transit. The Key System in the Bay Area comes to mind. Unfortunately, at this point it's financially infeasible for any private company to make the investments in infrastructure necessary to run a profitable system like this.
In most developed countries, it's easy to immigrate if you promise to drop a huge amount of money to start a local business thereby creating taxable income and new jobs.
If Microsoft doesn't write its own DRM software for Windows, the media companies will do it themselves or hire a third party to. We've seen what great things have come out of that arrangement in the past.
Let's say we took away all coprorate "rights", and it was now illegal for the board of McBigCorp to give money to their favorite McCongressmen. The board of McBigCorp could still give the board's members $100M in bonuses and the board members could, as private individuals, give $100M to their favorite McCongressmen. So long as the board members want McCongressmen to have the money, no law restricting corporate "rights" will stop them.
Corporations (and unions) are already prohibited from donating directly to candidates for federal office. However, people are allowed to form PACs with membership consisting of a company's employees and use money collected from those members (on which there are donation limits) to support candidates.
I hear this has also begun to happen in certain cities in southern California. The solution a lot of cities employ is to leave all the cameras up, but only maintain and operate a rotating small fraction of them.
Durham World Beer Fest... That certainly takes me back. A bunch of drunks under a tent located on the minor league ball diamond where 'Bull Durham' was shot. Lots of mud and lots beer. Good drunken memories of graduate school.
Lots of suburban wasteland hell. Personally, I'd rather eat glass than go back to working there. So many boring IT companies doing boring stuff too. Yuck, but I guess somebody has to do it somewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
There. Fixed that for you. You should be aware that OO and O2K3 are in pretty much the same boat. The fact that MS makes a 'converter' is besides the point; why should people go to the hassle of downloading, installing, and using the converter just to enable anti-social behavior by the small minority of Office 2007 users?
Actually, Office 2003 and XP can read the new Office 2007 file formats natively with a free add-in. In fact, 2003 will even go find the add-in when you try to load a docx for the first time. No converter necessary.
Of course it was. Microsoft has released SPs for all of their large pieces of software in recent history. It would be completely stupid to pretend that one wasn't going to come out for Vista. Hence, the planning. I don't think most slashdot readers understand how difficult it is to stabilize such a large, complex piece of software like Windows. It's just not possible to hold a release until "all the bugs are fixed" if you ever want it to be released.
From MS's point of view anyway. Just remember what MS is trying to achieve. They are not after perfection, they are just after having something that is good enough to make a sale. It does not have to work 100%.
Any serious software project cannot achieve 100% perfection. There's simply always another feature to add or a bug to fix. It's even more true for products like Windows which are so exceedingly complex that even small changes can be destabilizing. At a certain point, you have to choose keeping the bugs you know over those you don't know. You have to cut features you'd like to have but don't have time to code, test, document, etc.
They basically refuse to pay that price point because above a certain pay level it's simply more economical to offshore the job.
So tell me again how unionized auto workers aren't getting the shaft right now?
You're right--it's very easy to contract HPV. A common figure bandied about is 75-90% of sexually active adults will acquire the virus at some point in their lifetime.
Actually, a lot of lawyers do still use WordPerfect. Apparently, there have even been judges who rejected legal documents presented in Word format, demanding WordPerfect instead. I've been told the reason for this is that WordPerfect has historically had better document comparison features (how are these two contracts different? what clauses were changed in this version?)
See Groove or SharePoint.
But, as we look to the horizon of a decade hence, we see no silver bullet. There is no single development, in either technology or in management technique, that by itself promises even one order-of-magnitude improvement in productivity, in reliability, in simplicity. In this article, I shall try to show why, by examining both the nature of the software problem and the properties of the bullets proposed.
(my own emphasis added)
There are many prominent employers that do focus on looking for smart people with a strong aptitude for programming and worry less about skill lists and certs. I've certainly interviewed and worked for companies like that (including my current employer) and been unable to get past the HR screen for others.
Competitive salaries for entry level software developers are in and above that range (depending on where you're located geographically) right now. In fact, the starting salaries at a lot of companies are better now than they were during the bubble because stock options are in practice making up a lot less of employees' compensation these days.
The fact of the matter is that the market is not oversaturated right now, at least not for entry level positions. The bust in students wanting to do Computer Science that hit a few years ago is now working its way to graduation time. With the economy picking up, there is a growing shortage of qualified candidates. The best and the brightest graduating in the next few years have a lot of very good options for internships right and for full time positions when they finish in a couple years.
Sorry, but there's no silver bullet that's going to solve all our software development woes.
A mixture of CDMA and GSM as opposed to pure GSM plus a cell phone market where all companies lock the phones you buy to only work with that carrier. Fortunately, the laws just changed (I believe by a court ruling) such that having a third part unlock your phone for you is now completely legal.
The reason Estonia advanced its cellular technology so fast was because the existing Soviet era landline system was a mess and inadequate for the communication needs of the country. People had been on waiting lists for phones for years. When further investment in the infrastructure was available, cellphones were already on the scene so it made sense to focus there instead of on an outdated system.
That's not necessarily true. Before WWII, there was quite a lot of successful privately run and funded mass transit. The Key System in the Bay Area comes to mind. Unfortunately, at this point it's financially infeasible for any private company to make the investments in infrastructure necessary to run a profitable system like this.
In most developed countries, it's easy to immigrate if you promise to drop a huge amount of money to start a local business thereby creating taxable income and new jobs.
If Microsoft doesn't write its own DRM software for Windows, the media companies will do it themselves or hire a third party to. We've seen what great things have come out of that arrangement in the past.
I think some public schools might disagree.
Corporations (and unions) are already prohibited from donating directly to candidates for federal office. However, people are allowed to form PACs with membership consisting of a company's employees and use money collected from those members (on which there are donation limits) to support candidates.
I hear this has also begun to happen in certain cities in southern California. The solution a lot of cities employ is to leave all the cameras up, but only maintain and operate a rotating small fraction of them.
Just another reason, I'm glad I'm gay.
You might want to adjust that to read tenured faculty member.
Durham World Beer Fest... That certainly takes me back. A bunch of drunks under a tent located on the minor league ball diamond where 'Bull Durham' was shot. Lots of mud and lots beer. Good drunken memories of graduate school.
Lots of suburban wasteland hell. Personally, I'd rather eat glass than go back to working there. So many boring IT companies doing boring stuff too. Yuck, but I guess somebody has to do it somewhere.