You have a very good point, but enough of my bosses were dull, stupid fools that I worry a bit.
And I would not want to use a hard core, full on propaganda assault. I would just like it that the moderate advocacy someone might do isnt undone by a hard core, full on ( and deceptive ) ad campaign from MS.
But then, when they see ( Hopefully ) that the comparison was PC hardware to a mainframe, the point will be made.;-)
As to credibility, what credibility? Did I get some when I wasnt looking?:-)
Funny, how Ford's, GM's, and many other cars have borrowed ideas from each other, so much so, that automobiles are so much the same as each other.
Televisions, Clocks, Printers, Pictures ( negatives, prints ), Stoves, Airplanes, etc, etc.
If we draw the parallels to these products, shouldnt these various manufacturers have not appropriated each other's ideas? Shouldnt they be extremely distinct? As in whoever put 4 wheels on a car, near the extreme corners of the vehicle would be the only manufacturer allowed to use that idea, for example. I mean, it is questionable to borrow this idea, no? And it is not in the best interests of US Corps, so.... It should stop, right?
I think it has already been pointed out, but if you as an IT worker-bee are trying to educate your "superiours" ( bosses ) on Linux, *that* kind of advertising makes it unusable.
WB: Here is the link to the article I told you about on how Linux can save us some money. PBH: OK.
WB: What did you think of the article? Can we try a pilot program? PBH: No, I see from this ad on that website that the TCO on Windows is lower. We will stay the course.
Unfortunately, humans tend to put more weight on arguments that support their preconceived notions. I am *so* glad I am not a human.:-)
I wonder if there are regulations on accepting / rejecting advertisements? I.E. If the guys at LinuxInsider *did* want to reject the ad, but legal issues prevent them from doing so... ( stop laughing, please. )
Well, I used to work for a financial services company, and the prod env *was* different than the test env ( which was different than the dev env ).
Irksome no end.
On blame,
QA deserves some of the blame, they should not have blessed it, and their tests should have caught major problems.
The development team deserves some of the blame, they should have unit tested for this, and should have made sure that QA had whatever information they needed to check it before blessing it.
Management probably deserves most of the blame. I can only imagine that it was they that developed the schedules ( probably not realistic ) that the development and QA teams had to work within. Probably they that insisted that all features be developed within their timeframe, ignoring whatever pushback came from dev and QA. And probably they that decided to shorten the QA schedule to allow a bit more dev time ( seen it happen so many times... And I am a dev... ).
In the course of using this product, I had little trouble until I created an class that was, shall we say, oversized. It had a need to be big, let that pass. Intellisense stopped working. And on random compiles, the whole thing would lose it's mind ( thankfully not too often ), and start giving out bizzare error messasges ( one of them was "kind" enough to tell me that my class was "too complex", and I should do something about it ( which led me to wonder just *who* was driving... ) ). Reboot the machine, no code or environment changes, worked till next time.
MAybe I should take a course in C# programming. I am *sure* that will help...
*and*, once the computer is "appliancized", it may not be something a developer can really use anymore, at least not to develop with. Then these captains of industry can control developers, by forcing contractual terms on them about what, where, how and when they can develop, in exchange for hardware capable of developing with, and the tools with which to do it. Company store anyone?
I think the averager buyer knows a bit more than you give credit for. I dont mean on the geek subjects. I mean on the issues about free hardware, or free anything. They know that companies cant make money if they dont have some gotcha to go with the free whatever. I htink they know that they are paying for it.
Then why do they buy? Lack of real options. Apathy.
Sun makes hardware, if they wish to give away the hardware, and make the money on software, this seems doable for them. Smart? I dont know. Just something they *could* do, if they wanted.
Microsoft does not build PC hardware, AFAIK. I dont know, but I cant see Dell, HP, et al deciding that they are making too much, they need to give away the hardware. ( I can see them saying "I can put Linux on here and pay no licensing..." ( I can also see them saying "clunky MS software motivates more upselling to faster CPU's, we like this" ) ).
Also, isnt this a return to something like the "bad old days" of IBM hardware / software bundling, only, maybe backwards? Why would we want this? Hasnt this kinda been rejected by the marketplace?
Slashdot Mirror
That was why he wanted to be president, so he could fix things up for us all on this front.
5. Profit!!!
Are you a truck?
You said to ask you that.
I believe it is "half of us will recieve below median comp, the other half will be above".
Population of 10000,
9999 make 1.00/ year
1 makes 100,000,000.00/ year
Average is 10000.9999.
Only in the sense of the Hindenburg going up in flames.
What are they teaching moderators these days? The reference is not *that* obscure, is it? Or was the moderator trying to be funny?
First question : no
Second question : Your order has been placed for a new airship. Name of said to be "led". So, the answer is "now".
Thank you for your order. Please deposit 1,5 Million DM.
Computers are, in general trustworthy. Programmers can be untrustworthy. Disclaimer: I am one.
It is not as easy as you seem to think it is.
How do you do a recount, for instance?
It was probability, he had just regrouped an equation. Then he said
"and now I will take a p outside".
And proceeded to factor out the "p".
Me and another likeminded smartass started laughing. No-one else seemed to think it was as funny as we did.
Just my point.
And thanks for the namecalling. I found that especially informative.
15.736766809728183118741058655222
Only works *if* you have that administrative password.
Then you might like these links:
Gun aiming computer
nother
US and Japanese versions
a list with links
In what state do they keep the smart caps lock key in?
I loved the 5250 terminal keyboards. 24 function keys.
You have a very good point, but enough of my bosses were dull, stupid fools that I worry a bit.
;-)
:-)
And I would not want to use a hard core, full on propaganda assault. I would just like it that the moderate advocacy someone might do isnt undone by a hard core, full on ( and deceptive ) ad campaign from MS.
But then, when they see ( Hopefully ) that the comparison was PC hardware to a mainframe, the point will be made.
As to credibility, what credibility? Did I get some when I wasnt looking?
Hmmm.
Funny, how Ford's, GM's, and many other cars have borrowed ideas from each other, so much so, that automobiles are so much the same as each other.
Televisions,
Clocks,
Printers,
Pictures ( negatives, prints ),
Stoves,
Airplanes,
etc, etc.
If we draw the parallels to these products, shouldnt these various manufacturers have not appropriated each other's ideas? Shouldnt they be extremely distinct? As in whoever put 4 wheels on a car, near the extreme corners of the vehicle would be the only manufacturer allowed to use that idea, for example. I mean, it is questionable to borrow this idea, no? And it is not in the best interests of US Corps, so.... It should stop, right?
I think it has already been pointed out, but if you as an IT worker-bee are trying to educate your "superiours" ( bosses ) on Linux, *that* kind of advertising makes it unusable.
:-)
WB: Here is the link to the article I told you about on how Linux can save us some money.
PBH: OK.
WB: What did you think of the article? Can we try a pilot program?
PBH: No, I see from this ad on that website that the TCO on Windows is lower. We will stay the course.
Unfortunately, humans tend to put more weight on arguments that support their preconceived notions. I am *so* glad I am not a human.
I wonder if there are regulations on accepting / rejecting advertisements? I.E. If the guys at LinuxInsider *did* want to reject the ad, but legal issues prevent them from doing so... ( stop laughing, please. )
Well, I used to work for a financial services company, and the prod env *was* different than the test env ( which was different than the dev env ).
Irksome no end.
On blame,
QA deserves some of the blame, they should not have blessed it, and their tests should have caught major problems.
The development team deserves some of the blame, they should have unit tested for this, and should have made sure that QA had whatever information they needed to check it before blessing it.
Management probably deserves most of the blame. I can only imagine that it was they that developed the schedules ( probably not realistic ) that the development and QA teams had to work within. Probably they that insisted that all features be developed within their timeframe, ignoring whatever pushback came from dev and QA. And probably they that decided to shorten the QA schedule to allow a bit more dev time ( seen it happen so many times... And I am a dev... ).
In the course of using this product, I had little trouble until I created an class that was, shall we say, oversized. It had a need to be big, let that pass. Intellisense stopped working. And on random compiles, the whole thing would lose it's mind ( thankfully not too often ), and start giving out bizzare error messasges ( one of them was "kind" enough to tell me that my class was "too complex", and I should do something about it ( which led me to wonder just *who* was driving... ) ). Reboot the machine, no code or environment changes, worked till next time.
MAybe I should take a course in C# programming. I am *sure* that will help...
Try "DavidsPenis". You might get a "too big" message, but surely not a "too small".
They may mention DRM. The spin that they have put on DRM probably sounds pretty good to the uninformed at first glance.
:-)
I suspect they will learn about DRM as they use it.
What is the CBDTPA, please?
As XBox is nominally a game platform, I had not counted it. Do you think they can ramp up production enough to make their prediction come true?
*and*, once the computer is "appliancized", it may not be something a developer can really use anymore, at least not to develop with. Then these captains of industry can control developers, by forcing contractual terms on them about what, where, how and when they can develop, in exchange for hardware capable of developing with, and the tools with which to do it. Company store anyone?
I think the averager buyer knows a bit more than you give credit for. I dont mean on the geek subjects. I mean on the issues about free hardware, or free anything. They know that companies cant make money if they dont have some gotcha to go with the free whatever. I htink they know that they are paying for it.
Then why do they buy? Lack of real options. Apathy.
Sun makes hardware, if they wish to give away the hardware, and make the money on software, this seems doable for them. Smart? I dont know. Just something they *could* do, if they wanted.
Microsoft does not build PC hardware, AFAIK. I dont know, but I cant see Dell, HP, et al deciding that they are making too much, they need to give away the hardware. ( I can see them saying "I can put Linux on here and pay no licensing..." ( I can also see them saying "clunky MS software motivates more upselling to faster CPU's, we like this" ) ).
Also, isnt this a return to something like the "bad old days" of IBM hardware / software bundling, only, maybe backwards? Why would we want this? Hasnt this kinda been rejected by the marketplace?