Uh...it's been 2.0-y for a while. While I dislike new interfaces in general, this one has already earned better marks than the previous for simply being more useful and less buggy than the previous.
Sure, but that's assuming customers trusted the companies in question to do so.
The reason you might focus on these larger enterprise type organizations is to allow them the opportunity to create value for their product ( read: "Customer" ).
The customer trusts this 3rd party to handle the encryption/decryption/expiration, not the company holding their data.
It's convoluted, sure, but it's more viable than expecting end users to install plugins just to view images.
At least for what I'm looking for. Every now and then I figure, "Hey! I'll watch X! I've got a couple hours, why not?" And of course, you can't stream X. Happens a couple times a week to me.
Of course, then there's the case of the missing series in my instant queue. I had farscape on there, checked back in Dec...it had been moved to disk only. Crappy and annoying. Then it reappeared in my instant queue in January. No explanation.
I love the entire idea of streaming movies, but they need to get things more robust and reliable.
Here's an idea; chaulk it up to an expensive lesson...AND THEN NEVER REWARD THE BAD BEHAVIOR AGAIN. Obviously you didn't realize that you are only buying a license for the current format and hard copy. Now that you do....
Sure, that means you will be going with out whatever the latest HD is. Is it necessary? Really? What are you gaining?
Vista has serious performance issues. Same rig, difference between Vista and 7 is night and day. Under vista, the harddrive is constantly grinding. The bandwidth the drive is severely compromised, resulting in reduced desktop performance for simple things like browsing web pages or navigating the local file system. Installations take much longer too.
Format, reload 7? Everything was snappy. I did notice increased disk usage that wasn't present under xp, but no where near the level of Vista and it never interfered with what I was doing on the system.
Essentially, yes. If the worker themselves aren't interested in learning the new OS, then it's going to be a painful migration with little benefit to productivity ( but a boon to admins, granted ).
- On a corporate desktop, 2g is about the max I've seen in larger businesses. 4g is fine for BUSINESS apps - Most places are running OfficeXP/2003 for exactly the same reason we talking about here - Xp can be as secure as 7 for all intents and purposes. My users are limited users and only have access to what they need access to. This process is no different under 7 than it is under xp. - XP isn't any less stable than 7, that's a misconception perpetrated by admins that don't know what they are doing. - This is the only valid point you made. This, plus the security patches are enough to upgrade in my book. But try convincing your average user of this fact, or worse, your average manager.
Good luck. ( and yes, "vast businesses" are still on XP and who are exactly who I'm talking about ).
I'm still having a hard time understanding what technologies exist in 7 that don't in XP AND are something I ( or a business would need ).
The only reason to upgrade from XP is because security updates are due to end soon. And while that's a valid reason, most businesses are going to be asking themselves why they should upgrade if that's the only reason.
...is that everyone does it differently, and no one wants to conform to a uniform system. Why, you might ask? Because the current system is in place and, more importantly, people have learned how to game it.
I went through something like this years ago with a local government t&a project. There was a core group that understood it's value ( namely, IT and payroll ), but everyone else had been using tricks of the current, in place system ( which varied from dept to dept ) to get longer lunches, swap shifts or plain, flat out not work and get paid for it.
We never did get universal buy-in for the project, and it ended up dieing ( although, to be fair, the vendor didn't help things much ). Even in the best of times, T&A is a highly complex subject that almost no one understands. When you have people actively trying to undermine your efforts...well, you can imagine how much progress one might make.
( note: the depts that gave us the most headaches, btw, were fire and police. The "old boy" network had been in place so "billy bob" might take off a couple extra hours because he was the chief's friend. Needless to say, the new time keeping software didn't keep track of that "accurately", and people's feelings got hurt. )
Hold up, let me ask my telescope scientist friend his opinion of the points.
Ya, he doesn't like the degree being named after his primary tools either. ( not sarcasm, satire, as I'm not attempting to be rude to you, but illustrate my point ).
The argument is whether or not MS Windows created a demand. In my opinion, they did; they had an environment that was easy for people to get in to, as well as the marketing push to make more people want it.
There were better GUIs available at the time, but none had the traction that Windows did.
I often wonder if we do it a disservice by calling it "Computer Science". The work we do and the science we perform is that of information manipulation, specifically through various computer based implementations ( but not necessarily, as your example shows ).
Wouldn't a much better name for what we do be "Information Science"?
Serious question, who else will have access to the datacenter that issues these kill commands?
I think we all know, everything else aside, some hacker out there would LOVE to claim credit for disabling thousands of computers, costing intel a fortune in replacement fees.
Are they insane? Do they have any idea what this will do to the economy, let alone the precious information they are trying to hide? It's almost like...wait, it's the UN?
Nevermind. Here's hoping they'll be as effective in this initiative as they are in everything else.
Maybe such a thing as a "Good" project manager exists, but I have yet to meet them. The best managers of a project have been the technical leads who's asses and reputations are on the line, not someone who's title is project manager.
It's been my experience that those with the title of project manager are there to act as an interface between management ( who doesn't like dealing with the techs directly ) and the techs themselves. This barrier in communication does more to complicate projects than it does to streamline them.
I have netflix, and love the streaming capabilities. That said, it seems their streaming content is getting less rather than more. I had several titles in my queue that I was watching that are no longer available for streaming.
On top of that, none of what I want to watch seems to be available for streaming.
Again, it's not really the OS; it's the application.
Although I suppose the argument can be made that the more complex and the more facilities provided by the OS, the more likely developers will abuse them.
I have supported applications, running on linux, which have made the server act just like a stereotypically windows box.
Of course, as I understand it, OS/2 is no longer supported. Hence, you aren't allowed to run it in a financial capacity.
Slashdot Mirror
Hurray for Gates, saying what needs to be said. However...
It's not just mothers making these decision, but fathers too. Both parents make these decisions.
I'd like less innovation, and more honesty.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't our observable constrain be 14 billion light years IF we were at the epicenter of the big bang?
Instead, shouldn't there be some area of the sky that we can only find much younger stars, and others that appear further away?
Uh...it's been 2.0-y for a while. While I dislike new interfaces in general, this one has already earned better marks than the previous for simply being more useful and less buggy than the previous.
Sure, but that's assuming customers trusted the companies in question to do so.
The reason you might focus on these larger enterprise type organizations is to allow them the opportunity to create value for their product ( read: "Customer" ).
The customer trusts this 3rd party to handle the encryption/decryption/expiration, not the company holding their data.
It's convoluted, sure, but it's more viable than expecting end users to install plugins just to view images.
Don't make clients install a plugin. The client is in an unknown state, and most people will just ignore it anyway.
Instead, target the individual companies ( like facebook, google, shutterfly, ect... ) with this technology.
At least for what I'm looking for. Every now and then I figure, "Hey! I'll watch X! I've got a couple hours, why not?" And of course, you can't stream X. Happens a couple times a week to me.
Of course, then there's the case of the missing series in my instant queue. I had farscape on there, checked back in Dec...it had been moved to disk only. Crappy and annoying. Then it reappeared in my instant queue in January. No explanation.
I love the entire idea of streaming movies, but they need to get things more robust and reliable.
Here's an idea; chaulk it up to an expensive lesson...AND THEN NEVER REWARD THE BAD BEHAVIOR AGAIN. Obviously you didn't realize that you are only buying a license for the current format and hard copy. Now that you do....
Sure, that means you will be going with out whatever the latest HD is. Is it necessary? Really? What are you gaining?
Vista has serious performance issues. Same rig, difference between Vista and 7 is night and day. Under vista, the harddrive is constantly grinding. The bandwidth the drive is severely compromised, resulting in reduced desktop performance for simple things like browsing web pages or navigating the local file system. Installations take much longer too.
Format, reload 7? Everything was snappy. I did notice increased disk usage that wasn't present under xp, but no where near the level of Vista and it never interfered with what I was doing on the system.
Essentially, yes. If the worker themselves aren't interested in learning the new OS, then it's going to be a painful migration with little benefit to productivity ( but a boon to admins, granted ).
- On a corporate desktop, 2g is about the max I've seen in larger businesses. 4g is fine for BUSINESS apps
- Most places are running OfficeXP/2003 for exactly the same reason we talking about here
- Xp can be as secure as 7 for all intents and purposes. My users are limited users and only have access to what they need access to. This process is no different under 7 than it is under xp.
- XP isn't any less stable than 7, that's a misconception perpetrated by admins that don't know what they are doing.
- This is the only valid point you made. This, plus the security patches are enough to upgrade in my book. But try convincing your average user of this fact, or worse, your average manager.
Good luck. ( and yes, "vast businesses" are still on XP and who are exactly who I'm talking about ).
I'm still having a hard time understanding what technologies exist in 7 that don't in XP AND are something I ( or a business would need ).
The only reason to upgrade from XP is because security updates are due to end soon. And while that's a valid reason, most businesses are going to be asking themselves why they should upgrade if that's the only reason.
...is that everyone does it differently, and no one wants to conform to a uniform system. Why, you might ask? Because the current system is in place and, more importantly, people have learned how to game it.
I went through something like this years ago with a local government t&a project. There was a core group that understood it's value ( namely, IT and payroll ), but everyone else had been using tricks of the current, in place system ( which varied from dept to dept ) to get longer lunches, swap shifts or plain, flat out not work and get paid for it.
We never did get universal buy-in for the project, and it ended up dieing ( although, to be fair, the vendor didn't help things much ). Even in the best of times, T&A is a highly complex subject that almost no one understands. When you have people actively trying to undermine your efforts...well, you can imagine how much progress one might make.
( note: the depts that gave us the most headaches, btw, were fire and police. The "old boy" network had been in place so "billy bob" might take off a couple extra hours because he was the chief's friend. Needless to say, the new time keeping software didn't keep track of that "accurately", and people's feelings got hurt. )
You realize we're talking about politicians right?
I had to look at your handle before I got that you were joking. :)
Hold up, let me ask my telescope scientist friend his opinion of the points.
Ya, he doesn't like the degree being named after his primary tools either. ( not sarcasm, satire, as I'm not attempting to be rude to you, but illustrate my point ).
The argument is whether or not MS Windows created a demand. In my opinion, they did; they had an environment that was easy for people to get in to, as well as the marketing push to make more people want it.
There were better GUIs available at the time, but none had the traction that Windows did.
Economy of scale. Arguably, the Windows OS brought the PC into a large number of homes, spurring the sale of workstations/PCs in ever higher numbers.
Hence, computers got cheaper because we were buying more of them.
I often wonder if we do it a disservice by calling it "Computer Science". The work we do and the science we perform is that of information manipulation, specifically through various computer based implementations ( but not necessarily, as your example shows ).
Wouldn't a much better name for what we do be "Information Science"?
Serious question, who else will have access to the datacenter that issues these kill commands?
I think we all know, everything else aside, some hacker out there would LOVE to claim credit for disabling thousands of computers, costing intel a fortune in replacement fees.
Are they insane? Do they have any idea what this will do to the economy, let alone the precious information they are trying to hide? It's almost like...wait, it's the UN?
Nevermind. Here's hoping they'll be as effective in this initiative as they are in everything else.
Maybe such a thing as a "Good" project manager exists, but I have yet to meet them. The best managers of a project have been the technical leads who's asses and reputations are on the line, not someone who's title is project manager.
It's been my experience that those with the title of project manager are there to act as an interface between management ( who doesn't like dealing with the techs directly ) and the techs themselves. This barrier in communication does more to complicate projects than it does to streamline them.
I mean, besides Disney and all that.
I have netflix, and love the streaming capabilities. That said, it seems their streaming content is getting less rather than more. I had several titles in my queue that I was watching that are no longer available for streaming.
On top of that, none of what I want to watch seems to be available for streaming.
Again, it's not really the OS; it's the application.
Although I suppose the argument can be made that the more complex and the more facilities provided by the OS, the more likely developers will abuse them.
I have supported applications, running on linux, which have made the server act just like a stereotypically windows box.
Of course, as I understand it, OS/2 is no longer supported. Hence, you aren't allowed to run it in a financial capacity.
Awesome news, too bad we're talking about Suse.
I'll use WindowsME, thanks.