could postnuke and your company help a newspaper daily deal with the content flow of moving content to the legal, creative, copyediting, editor desks, and record all changes along the way, while also keeping the print template/quark documents in sync with the web templates ? and having a consistent and separate ability to manage stock photography, video, audio, and other creative assets with the ability to lightbox those assets in all of the phases of design ?
a content management solution isn't just for publishing docs on the web.
php is only good for a place that produces WEB content.
php isn't gonna help anyone at a daily newspaper, or an audio/video production house, or a catalog company...these are places that need and use CMS solutions. the common mistake here is to assume that "content management" only applies to websites.
You can find problems with every CMS product, but the REAL problem is not with the technical details.
which database, perl or python, web-centric, XML or not...these are technical issues that CAN be worked out, and are basically irrelevent.
for example, from reading your post, it seems as if one requirement you have is the ability to scale with users and size of content. that can be fixed, althought I'm sure you're finding it difficult so far.
what is *MORE* difficult to fix is getting a CMS to work in an intuitive and efficient way for a particular organization.
before the web, there were CMS products, except they were specific to each industry (print, photography, audio/video production, etc.) -- to think that a postgres/php/apache setup is going to be able to address the content flow/management issues of all those industries would be very naive.
I believe that organizations that need CMS tools need to pick one (or build one) that is as specific and custom as possible.
no, but I think the aim of this book is to provide a methodology of practice and understanding your users from a content perspective, which is often overlooked.
unfortunately, a lot of organizations often just lean on the technical merits of a particular CMS software solution with no regard to the users who will use it to control content flow.
your advice works when you're talking about managing a website, but Content Management needs to be able to work anywhere.
cvs, makefiles, and perl can't do it for a daily newspaper, weekly syndicated catalog company, or ad agency who needs to have stock photography categorized and in-sync with newsletters.
a lot of people assume that "content management" is nothing but a way to keep a website up to date, which is like saying engines are only used for mowing lawns.
Most books/discussions involving content management these days are too focused on the technical details of particular CMS solutions, and of course everybody has their own opinion.
The fact is, most CMS products (open source or not) only have value if it's done along with educating users and evaluating the specific ways people are using content.
Most people think of dynamic websites when they think of content management, but there are MANY organizations that use/need solutions that can't just be solved with your runofthemill PHP/MySql/Apache. it's just not as simple as that.
How about daily newspapers ?
Weekly magazines ?
Technical journals ?
Catalog producers, Creative departments in ad agencies, stock photography libraries....the list can go on and on.
One of the largest mistake of implementing a CMS is a perspective problem. You can't allow the flow of content in an organization to be dictated by the software only. There needs to be an understanding of how content flows in order for a CMS to work correctly. Otherwise, you might as well not even have a CMS.
of how you fall back on your standard "I'm right and smart, listent to me, you're all dumb" posts.
just when I thought you were gone, you're back, posting crap. didn't that guy who you threatened sue you yet ?
...when the trend is that *all* ISPs put this in the ir contracts, bad things happen.
One of those bad things is that it will inhibit the innovation that is available. If it weren't for NAT technology, MANY commercial technologies would not be possible. It's called a chilling of innovation.
Is it legal ? sure. Their bandwidth, right ? They can do whatever they want with it, right ? Sure. Doesn't mean that the practice won't have a harmful effect on the future.
i have to deal with architectures that get enormous traffic, and from a performance standpoint, there is simply nothing worse than dynamic database-backend content.
i pose that 95% of the sites out there don't need it. at ALL. use php for content management, yes, but BUILD STATIC PAGES!!!! to do otherwise is just silly and asking for headaches.
Ellison commands attention, and I don't care if he's fucking Bozo the clown. He's right and you know it...so who cares ?
or is this just another excuse for you to say "so-and-so doesn't know what he's talking about"
in response to an earlier post of yours, I'm pretty sure that 'registration' for a copyright is not required...it's copyrighted the second you create it.
This is the standard argument for most of why copyright is too long today, and for some examples, it's true.
But the point can be made the other way, too. What about books that peak VERY late, like the Dead Sea Scrolls ? Yes, I'm being facetious here...just because everyone has the right to collect on writing a classic doesn't mean that we have to make a sweeping law of copyright that covers every work for 70 years plus the lifetime of the author.
Without having much in the way of examples, the ability for others to build upon (i.e. make derivative works of) is basically shut down by copyright law, for a very long time....too long for the copyright holders to even make any more money off of it.
For example, a movie to even include a Hooters poster in the dormroom of a fraternity guy, that film must have many $$ to cover the cost of that, hampering the creativity of the director.
I think 14 years is *plenty* of time for a copyright holder to hold control of permission over their work.
My perspective is...if I'm an author, then I'm not going to be sitting on my hands for 14 years, soaking up the control-trip...I'll be writing more things along the way.
I think that since the original idea of copyright (Jefferson) was 14 years way back then...then it might even be ok for it to be even less than that, since publishing is almost costless with some mediums now and instantaneous as well.
but my main point is...until you can say, unequivocally, that "evil" companies are *replacing* US workers with H1-B visas, then it's hard to place blame on that being the reason why people get fired.
what i see on slashdot ALL the time about H1 visa issues is people complaining that they lost their job due to a foreigner, and that is taken to be truth, when the reality is that every case is not only different, but most likely unprovable.
also, as some posters point out, companies that hire H1 visas have, in most cases, found out that it is sometimes not worth the trouble dealing with, and since the candidate pool is so large these days, they prefer NOT to hire H1 visa candidates.
i also disagree that most people don't care about worker's rights...on the contrary, most people DO. this country has the largest (rivaling the power of organized crime gangs) worker's rights-oriented organizations in the WORLD. unions, guilds....these are the things that keep people employed up until the very last moment possible.
and you can't mix that with human rights...that is a completely other issue entirely, and while related, anything that happens across our borders, VERY unfortunately (as in the case with Nike) is not paid attention to by the US labor organizations.
my original question (and i'm still trying to answer) was: where are the statistics for this ? and how can you tell the difference between a company "replacing" a perfectly performing US worker with a H1-B visa candidate because it was cheaper, and someone who complains about getting fired for some legit reason, whose position was filled later by a H1-B visa ?
this is the allegation that most of the bitter posters today have been posting about, and that i have a problem with.
standing up for oneself does not make one a whiner, no.
has anything gone wrong more than once in my life ? yes.
but being dramatic and saying that allowing H-1b visas are 'building an empire on the backs of slaves' is just that: dramatic.
i was asking for the statistics. when a company fires someone, and then hires a foreigner for the same position for smaller pay, then no, i don't agree or condone that. but what if the company DOESN'T backfill the job for months, then hires a H1-B visa ? isn't that fair ? how long do YOU think that companies should have to wait ?
or maybe you're against ANY foreign peoples trying to find a job here.
what about a US company who fires someone because they suck as an employee ? and then hires an H1-B because they are are best candidate for the job ?
what about a US company who has an overseas office, and hires a citizen of that country ? what then ?
empires built on slaves, you say ?
if you think that there aren't people who are using the H1-B visa issue to further their own interests after being fired, you are fooling yourself.
i personally don't believe that it's balanced either way, but to say that all companies (and the H1-B visas themselves) are evil and bad...well that's just (again) dramatic and wrong.
How much do you think that Linux usage statistics reflect the public's understanding of the licensing issues involved with Open Source (and Free) software ?
so you're saying that if you don't have a long distance plan in Tuscon, then you pay NO telephone company NO money, yet you can call someone on a local number from YOUR phone ? you pay $0.00 for phone service ? bullshit. not only do I not believe you, I challenge you to tell me how you manage to do that.
where *most* americans come from, you DO have to pay to use a phone. I have a cell phone, and I don't use it to talk to friends. If I DIDN'T have a cell phone, then I would not have work, period. I need it for my job, and so do a lot of other people. Maybe you'll be happy when you don't have a cell phone to call 911 after you have a heart attack driving on the desert highway, huh ?
Who are you, to imply that having a cell phone is useless ?
Slashdot Mirror
could postnuke and your company help a newspaper daily deal with the content flow of moving content to the legal, creative, copyediting, editor desks, and record all changes along the way, while also keeping the print template/quark documents in sync with the web templates ? and having a consistent and separate ability to manage stock photography, video, audio, and other creative assets with the ability to lightbox those assets in all of the phases of design ? a content management solution isn't just for publishing docs on the web.
php is only good for a place that produces WEB content.
php isn't gonna help anyone at a daily newspaper, or an audio/video production house, or a catalog company...these are places that need and use CMS solutions. the common mistake here is to assume that "content management" only applies to websites.
You can find problems with every CMS product, but the REAL problem is not with the technical details.
which database, perl or python, web-centric, XML or not...these are technical issues that CAN be worked out, and are basically irrelevent.
for example, from reading your post, it seems as if one requirement you have is the ability to scale with users and size of content. that can be fixed, althought I'm sure you're finding it difficult so far.
what is *MORE* difficult to fix is getting a CMS to work in an intuitive and efficient way for a particular organization.
before the web, there were CMS products, except they were specific to each industry (print, photography, audio/video production, etc.) -- to think that a postgres/php/apache setup is going to be able to address the content flow/management issues of all those industries would be very naive.
I believe that organizations that need CMS tools need to pick one (or build one) that is as specific and custom as possible.
no, but I think the aim of this book is to provide a methodology of practice and understanding your users from a content perspective, which is often overlooked. unfortunately, a lot of organizations often just lean on the technical merits of a particular CMS software solution with no regard to the users who will use it to control content flow.
your advice works when you're talking about managing a website, but Content Management needs to be able to work anywhere.
cvs, makefiles, and perl can't do it for a daily newspaper, weekly syndicated catalog company, or ad agency who needs to have stock photography categorized and in-sync with newsletters.
a lot of people assume that "content management" is nothing but a way to keep a website up to date, which is like saying engines are only used for mowing lawns.
Most books/discussions involving content management these days are too focused on the technical details of particular CMS solutions, and of course everybody has their own opinion. The fact is, most CMS products (open source or not) only have value if it's done along with educating users and evaluating the specific ways people are using content. Most people think of dynamic websites when they think of content management, but there are MANY organizations that use/need solutions that can't just be solved with your runofthemill PHP/MySql/Apache. it's just not as simple as that. How about daily newspapers ? Weekly magazines ? Technical journals ? Catalog producers, Creative departments in ad agencies, stock photography libraries....the list can go on and on. One of the largest mistake of implementing a CMS is a perspective problem. You can't allow the flow of content in an organization to be dictated by the software only. There needs to be an understanding of how content flows in order for a CMS to work correctly. Otherwise, you might as well not even have a CMS.
you saying you're a 390 or MVS programmer ? yeah right. Unix != mainframes, bonehead.
of how you fall back on your standard "I'm right and smart, listent to me, you're all dumb" posts. just when I thought you were gone, you're back, posting crap. didn't that guy who you threatened sue you yet ?
...when the trend is that *all* ISPs put this in the ir contracts, bad things happen.
One of those bad things is that it will inhibit the innovation that is available. If it weren't for NAT technology, MANY commercial technologies would not be possible. It's called a chilling of innovation.
Is it legal ? sure. Their bandwidth, right ? They can do whatever they want with it, right ? Sure. Doesn't mean that the practice won't have a harmful effect on the future.
where i come from, there's a distinct difference between a desktop support person and systems/network administrator.
i have to deal with architectures that get enormous traffic, and from a performance standpoint, there is simply nothing worse than dynamic database-backend content.
i pose that 95% of the sites out there don't need it. at ALL. use php for content management, yes, but BUILD STATIC PAGES!!!! to do otherwise is just silly and asking for headaches.
Ellison commands attention, and I don't care if he's fucking Bozo the clown. He's right and you know it...so who cares ? or is this just another excuse for you to say "so-and-so doesn't know what he's talking about"
hmm...thanks. i hadn't heard of a (p) before, and still trying to educate myself in the way of the CC creativecommons license. gracias.
in response to an earlier post of yours, I'm pretty sure that 'registration' for a copyright is not required...it's copyrighted the second you create it.
This is the standard argument for most of why copyright is too long today, and for some examples, it's true. But the point can be made the other way, too. What about books that peak VERY late, like the Dead Sea Scrolls ? Yes, I'm being facetious here...just because everyone has the right to collect on writing a classic doesn't mean that we have to make a sweeping law of copyright that covers every work for 70 years plus the lifetime of the author. Without having much in the way of examples, the ability for others to build upon (i.e. make derivative works of) is basically shut down by copyright law, for a very long time....too long for the copyright holders to even make any more money off of it. For example, a movie to even include a Hooters poster in the dormroom of a fraternity guy, that film must have many $$ to cover the cost of that, hampering the creativity of the director.
I think 14 years is *plenty* of time for a copyright holder to hold control of permission over their work.
My perspective is...if I'm an author, then I'm not going to be sitting on my hands for 14 years, soaking up the control-trip...I'll be writing more things along the way.
I think that since the original idea of copyright (Jefferson) was 14 years way back then...then it might even be ok for it to be even less than that, since publishing is almost costless with some mediums now and instantaneous as well.
If Microsoft DID actually "get it" and go opensource, dropping their strategy and opening up code and changed their development ideas...
would the OSS/FS community be able to handle that ?
and would anyone help them out ?
(assuming that, let's say it's released under GPL or BSD style licenses)
for what it's worth...they don't have Apple X servers crunching numbers...they have SGIs and a beowulf.
i see and agree with some of what you say.
but my main point is...until you can say, unequivocally, that "evil" companies are *replacing* US workers with H1-B visas, then it's hard to place blame on that being the reason why people get fired.
what i see on slashdot ALL the time about H1 visa issues is people complaining that they lost their job due to a foreigner, and that is taken to be truth, when the reality is that every case is not only different, but most likely unprovable.
also, as some posters point out, companies that hire H1 visas have, in most cases, found out that it is sometimes not worth the trouble dealing with, and since the candidate pool is so large these days, they prefer NOT to hire H1 visa candidates.
i also disagree that most people don't care about worker's rights...on the contrary, most people DO. this country has the largest (rivaling the power of organized crime gangs) worker's rights-oriented organizations in the WORLD. unions, guilds....these are the things that keep people employed up until the very last moment possible.
and you can't mix that with human rights...that is a completely other issue entirely, and while related, anything that happens across our borders, VERY unfortunately (as in the case with Nike) is not paid attention to by the US labor organizations.
my original question (and i'm still trying to answer) was: where are the statistics for this ? and how can you tell the difference between a company "replacing" a perfectly performing US worker with a H1-B visa candidate because it was cheaper, and someone who complains about getting fired for some legit reason, whose position was filled later by a H1-B visa ?
this is the allegation that most of the bitter posters today have been posting about, and that i have a problem with.
standing up for oneself does not make one a whiner, no. has anything gone wrong more than once in my life ? yes. but being dramatic and saying that allowing H-1b visas are 'building an empire on the backs of slaves' is just that: dramatic. i was asking for the statistics. when a company fires someone, and then hires a foreigner for the same position for smaller pay, then no, i don't agree or condone that. but what if the company DOESN'T backfill the job for months, then hires a H1-B visa ? isn't that fair ? how long do YOU think that companies should have to wait ? or maybe you're against ANY foreign peoples trying to find a job here. what about a US company who fires someone because they suck as an employee ? and then hires an H1-B because they are are best candidate for the job ? what about a US company who has an overseas office, and hires a citizen of that country ? what then ? empires built on slaves, you say ? if you think that there aren't people who are using the H1-B visa issue to further their own interests after being fired, you are fooling yourself. i personally don't believe that it's balanced either way, but to say that all companies (and the H1-B visas themselves) are evil and bad...well that's just (again) dramatic and wrong.
between lawsuits like this that is real and correct, and lawsuits that are the result of whiners who lost their job hoping to make cash ?
z %2 2&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=1993Mar18.15305 3.28942%40samba.oit.unc.edu&rnum=2
for example, the man bringing the lawsuit, Walter Kruz, has been fired before, and made a stink about it before:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22walter+kru
check it here, where he made the same claim in 1993:
z %2 2&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=1993Mar18.15305 3.28942%40samba.oit.unc.edu&rnum=2
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22Walter+Kru
someone show me statistics that proves suits like this aren't the result of bunch of whiners who lost their job.
They are doing fine.
./ who have "predicted" their demise for the past 2 years.
Bah humbug to all of the people on
How much do you think that Linux usage statistics reflect the public's understanding of the licensing issues involved with Open Source (and Free) software ?
so you're saying that if you don't have a long distance plan in Tuscon, then you pay NO telephone company NO money, yet you can call someone on a local number from YOUR phone ? you pay $0.00 for phone service ? bullshit. not only do I not believe you, I challenge you to tell me how you manage to do that.
where *most* americans come from, you DO have to pay to use a phone. I have a cell phone, and I don't use it to talk to friends. If I DIDN'T have a cell phone, then I would not have work, period. I need it for my job, and so do a lot of other people. Maybe you'll be happy when you don't have a cell phone to call 911 after you have a heart attack driving on the desert highway, huh ?
Who are you, to imply that having a cell phone is useless ?