The article states, "For a truly objective assessment, it is usually best to engage an external consultant who is not involved with system maintenance. However, senior organization members are an invaluable resource for these consultants."
No, what usually happens (in my experience, 20+ years IT) is that the seniors get fired, then have to be hired back as consultants at 3x their former pay.
the US, along with its vast military-industrial complex, the Department of Defense and DARPA's investments into pie-in-the-sky technologies, and our massive academic research establishment are what you and the entire fucking world HAS TO THANK for the "internet"
Uh... the World Wide Web was invented at CERN, in Europe (hello Timmy Berners-Lee). So should we make sure the EU keeps total control of all web-related standards?
Yeah... does anyone else remember the old Cookie Monster virus? Every once in a while, it would pop up a message on your screen saying "GIVE ME COOKIE" with a prompt. If you typed in the word "cookie," it disappeared and let you keep working for awhile. In certain versions of the virus, if you typed in something else, it trashed your hard drive.
My thinking was, "they're measuring the output of this thing in terms of electricity, with the input in terms of heat, so...." But thanks for clarifying it.
"...this technique consumes orders of magnitude more energy than it produces."...because it takes energy to produce heat, right?
What about sources of heat that we don't need to fuel? Like reflected sunlight in a solar chamber, or molten rock closer to the center of the earth (or to volcanos, etc.)? Could we set up crystals like this to be heated via these methods, then capture the energy output somehow? What about adding these to other fueling methods that already produce great heat (like a nuclear plant) as augmentation?
IANAS (I am not a scientist), so this may be a stupid question.
In America, if you are on the Internet often enough to keep a blog, and you are technologically savvy enough to know what a blog is, you are probably not economically poor. You MIGHT be, but it is FAR MORE LIKELY that you are middle-class or rich.
Globally, if you have a blog, you are almost certainly in the top ONE PERCENT on any realistic economic scale -- probably in the top one-half-of-one-percent, or even one-quarter. It means you can read and write, you have a computer and know how to use it, you have some kind of Internet access, and you are probably not starving to death or dying of disease.
So please clarify what you mean by "rich" and "poor".
Microsoft used to take alpha software, call it stable and release it to the unsuspecting public! At least beta software should have gone through some more rigorous testing....
Adobe owned Freehand once before, actually. PageMaker and Freehand were originally made by a company called Aldus. Adobe bought Aldus and suddenly had Illustrator and Freehand in the same locker room. Adobe sold Freehand to Altsys (who also made Fontographer, if I recall), which was then bought by Macromedia. This was about ten years ago.
So maybe, instead of keeping Freehand and Fireworks, they will sell 'em off to the highest bidder. There may even be legal issues around that (e.g. some kind of requirement by law), though IANAL, so don't quote me on that. Just wondering.
(Aldus also made software called Persuasion, which was the only competitor to PowerPoint. But Persuasion kicked PowerPoint's ass -- things like multiple master pages, great graphics and font support, etc. It died once Microsoft started bundling PowerPoint with Office.)
Whoops, wrong link and wrong numbers; try these. Verizon's National Access service is 60-80k (peak 144k) while their Broadband Access runs 400k-700k (though I think it has upload speeds around 60k).
I know people who do this, on their train commutes to and from New York City. They pay $80 for Verizon's "broadband" Internet access (theoretical 256k access through a cell phone). Then they use Skype to make international conference calls with their corporate offices in India and England. The Verizon coverage drops out here and there, but otherwise the voice clarity of Skype is superior (and much cheaper) than the equivelent communication options from Verizon.
The best part is when they share their Internet access with the rest of the train, using WiFi. Then everyone gets to surf....
I was searching through ProQuest a couple of years ago and came across a research article about the MS grammar checker. In the experiment, a group of high school students in an advanced English class were given their final exam. Half of the students had to use pen and paper to write it. The other half were given Microsoft Word and allowed to use its spell checker and grammar checker.
The students with just pen and paper had markedly better grammar in their essays.
I don't have ProQuest access right now. Otherwise I'd look up the reference....
A good book about the economics of computing is Paul Strassman's The Squandered Computer. It is a few years old, but still useful (and very prescient for its time). Some examples: "for 55% of U.S. firms, the computer budget exceeds their economic value-added." Or, "there is no demonstrable relationship between computer spending and corporate profits."
Yeah, but can't WiFi throttle down to 1 or 2Mb/s? Normally that is just for extended range, but why not temporarily drop the bandwidth and power just to a level low enough to maintain the link, then boost it when a call comes in?
Admittedly, I'm not a WiFi expert... just wondering about this.
What is the biodegradability (or recyclability) of these cans and the chemicals in them? Is this just one more "convenience good" for people to use and toss away?
A hundred CDs won't take long. I've got iTunes set so that when I insert a CD, it automatically rips it, catalogs it, then ejects the disc. It can even do this in the background while I work. I've got nearly 200 ripped this way, and it wasn't a chore.
The real problem is the LP and cassette tapes I have which are out of print, and have never been produced as CDs. Sure, I can hook up my computer to a stereo and record the music directly, then convert it to MP3. I've done this for a few choice albums. But the process is extremely intensive: either you stop it manually after each song so you can save the recorded file, or you record the whole album to a single audio file and then chop it up in a music editor. Both are long. I usually opt for the latter approach because I can do the slicing anytime; the important thing is to get it into the computer.
I wish there was software that could take a long audio stream of manys songs, let you set breakpoints along the sequence, then automatically save each song to a seperate file. Kind of like an audio version of ImageReady's "slices". Does such a thing exist?
I haven't seen the data, just the WIRED article, but we should have a few questions about the research and the conclusions. How do percentages compare to total numbers? How were the results "randomly selected"? Were location, demographics or time of day taken into account? Maybe more people are surfing from their work, where porn is blocked by firewalls or would be deemed socially unacceptable. Maybe more children are online. Maybe more low-income people are online. Are AltaVista users really representative of the entire Internet population, or was it just the handiest data source? According to this, this and this, AltaVista has barely any search engine market share left. Could AltaVista users simply be more intent on more information-savvy results rather than porn, simply because they're only trying AltaVista after being not fully satisfied with results elsewhere? (...and porn users can get their fill elsewhere?)
And, without studying other search engines, you cannot say that all people are taking less than five minutes, and only looking at the first two pages of results. Maybe that's because AltaVista's results and interface suck, compared to Google and others.
The best these researchers can really say is, "This suggests further research."
If I want to do a major hardware upgrade on an imac I purchased a year ago, I'm basically out of luck.
Have you actually seen the new iMac G5? There are quite a few items you can replace yourself if you want -- with an amazing level of ease. As Macintouch said, "With the iMac G5, Apple has written a new chapter in computer accessibility. You simply lay it face-down on a flat surface covered with a cotton cloth, unscrew three captive Phillips-head screws, and tilt off the back with its integral stand. You then have complete, unfettered access to the entire computer, and it's very easy to add an AirPort card or upgrade memory. The hard drive is right there, too, along with the rest of the components. Apple seems to be setting up a new service system that encourages customers to do many of their own repairs."
You can't upgrade the processor (well, not yet -- look out for third parties to figure it out, like they always do) but right out of the box, you can upgrade most everything that you might want to upgrade.
"To adopt Macs we must hire at least three [admins] to keep things going."
For one Mac? Or for hundreds of Macs? Real world example of Mac support costs: throughout the 1990's, I worked as a half-time Mac support person on a college campus with around 80 Macs (OS 8 and 9, no X out yet). That's 20 hours per week supporting 80 computers (about a third laptops), or roughly 15 minutes per week (to average the numbers. At the time there were about 350 Windows PCs (all Windows 95 and 98) on the same campus, with four full-time staff and five half-time college students to support them. That's 260 hours per week for 350 PCs, or 40 minutes per week (average). And these numbers assume that a full work week is 40 hours, but most of the PC guys (and a gal) routinely worked 50 or 60 hours, whereas I stuck to 20 hours almost every week. Furthermore, our Macs had a much lower turnover rate (e.g. we replaced Macs every 3-4 years instead of 2-3 years). This isn't because of some kind of purchasing bias from the IT department; replacements were generally ordered as requested by faculty and staff.
However, if you really want to inflate your Mac support costs, have a Windows support technician try to fix a Mac. He'll take ten times longer than a Mac guy because he won't know what the hell he's doing. And it will still be broken when he's done.
Another form of protesting the Republican National Convention: Joshua Kinberg's Bikes Against Bush, which allows you to type in a text message on his web site and have it spray-painted (well, spray-chalked) directly on the streets of New York via his wireless computerized pedal-powered spray-painting bicycle.
There are soooo many better deals available, why would you even want to use AT&T?
Uh... in my neck of the woods (upstate NY), there aren't many deals at all... AT&T is among the cheapest if you factor in total packages (local, regional, long distance). Maybe your area has better deals, but don't speak for us all.
At least for illustrators, Alias SketchBook Pro is a godsend. I don't use it myself, but I've spent the last six months doing Tablet PC UI research for Microsoft, and the people who are most passionate about these computers are professional illustrators and artists. Unfortunately that's not MS's primary target audience, but hey....
Sure, a dummy email address will keep YOU from getting spam, but you may actually be dumping the problem in someone else's lap. Even if it's not a valid email address, it may still be taxing the bandwidth and SMTP processing time at that domain -- so it's costing money and/or time to somebody.
What you really need is a kick-ass email control system (akin to disposable addresses, but much more powerful), like this.
Slashdot Mirror
The article states, "For a truly objective assessment, it is usually best to engage an external consultant who is not involved with system maintenance. However, senior organization members are an invaluable resource for these consultants." No, what usually happens (in my experience, 20+ years IT) is that the seniors get fired, then have to be hired back as consultants at 3x their former pay.
the US, along with its vast military-industrial complex, the Department of Defense and DARPA's investments into pie-in-the-sky technologies, and our massive academic research establishment are what you and the entire fucking world HAS TO THANK for the "internet"
Uh... the World Wide Web was invented at CERN, in Europe (hello Timmy Berners-Lee). So should we make sure the EU keeps total control of all web-related standards?
Yeah... does anyone else remember the old Cookie Monster virus? Every once in a while, it would pop up a message on your screen saying "GIVE ME COOKIE" with a prompt. If you typed in the word "cookie," it disappeared and let you keep working for awhile. In certain versions of the virus, if you typed in something else, it trashed your hard drive.
Reminds me of that bumper sticker... "WORK HARDER! Millions on Welfare are Counting On You!"
Thank you, that's the funniest thing I've read in weeks. Sorry I can't mod you up....
See, I told you I wasn't a scientist.
My thinking was, "they're measuring the output of this thing in terms of electricity, with the input in terms of heat, so...." But thanks for clarifying it.
"...this technique consumes orders of magnitude more energy than it produces." ...because it takes energy to produce heat, right?
What about sources of heat that we don't need to fuel? Like reflected sunlight in a solar chamber, or molten rock closer to the center of the earth (or to volcanos, etc.)? Could we set up crystals like this to be heated via these methods, then capture the energy output somehow? What about adding these to other fueling methods that already produce great heat (like a nuclear plant) as augmentation?
IANAS (I am not a scientist), so this may be a stupid question.
In America, if you are on the Internet often enough to keep a blog, and you are technologically savvy enough to know what a blog is, you are probably not economically poor. You MIGHT be, but it is FAR MORE LIKELY that you are middle-class or rich.
Globally, if you have a blog, you are almost certainly in the top ONE PERCENT on any realistic economic scale -- probably in the top one-half-of-one-percent, or even one-quarter. It means you can read and write, you have a computer and know how to use it, you have some kind of Internet access, and you are probably not starving to death or dying of disease.
So please clarify what you mean by "rich" and "poor".
Microsoft used to take alpha software, call it stable and release it to the unsuspecting public! At least beta software should have gone through some more rigorous testing....
Adobe owned Freehand once before, actually. PageMaker and Freehand were originally made by a company called Aldus. Adobe bought Aldus and suddenly had Illustrator and Freehand in the same locker room. Adobe sold Freehand to Altsys (who also made Fontographer, if I recall), which was then bought by Macromedia. This was about ten years ago.
So maybe, instead of keeping Freehand and Fireworks, they will sell 'em off to the highest bidder. There may even be legal issues around that (e.g. some kind of requirement by law), though IANAL, so don't quote me on that. Just wondering.
(Aldus also made software called Persuasion, which was the only competitor to PowerPoint. But Persuasion kicked PowerPoint's ass -- things like multiple master pages, great graphics and font support, etc. It died once Microsoft started bundling PowerPoint with Office.)
Whoops, wrong link and wrong numbers; try these. Verizon's National Access service is 60-80k (peak 144k) while their Broadband Access runs 400k-700k (though I think it has upload speeds around 60k).
I know people who do this, on their train commutes to and from New York City. They pay $80 for Verizon's "broadband" Internet access (theoretical 256k access through a cell phone). Then they use Skype to make international conference calls with their corporate offices in India and England. The Verizon coverage drops out here and there, but otherwise the voice clarity of Skype is superior (and much cheaper) than the equivelent communication options from Verizon.
The best part is when they share their Internet access with the rest of the train, using WiFi. Then everyone gets to surf....
I was searching through ProQuest a couple of years ago and came across a research article about the MS grammar checker. In the experiment, a group of high school students in an advanced English class were given their final exam. Half of the students had to use pen and paper to write it. The other half were given Microsoft Word and allowed to use its spell checker and grammar checker.
The students with just pen and paper had markedly better grammar in their essays.
I don't have ProQuest access right now. Otherwise I'd look up the reference....
You should read Thomas Pynchon's "The Crying of Lot 49"... lots of secret messages in stamps. WASTE away, folks.
A good book about the economics of computing is Paul Strassman's The Squandered Computer. It is a few years old, but still useful (and very prescient for its time). Some examples: "for 55% of U.S. firms, the computer budget exceeds their economic value-added." Or, "there is no demonstrable relationship between computer spending and corporate profits."
Yeah, but can't WiFi throttle down to 1 or 2Mb/s? Normally that is just for extended range, but why not temporarily drop the bandwidth and power just to a level low enough to maintain the link, then boost it when a call comes in?
Admittedly, I'm not a WiFi expert... just wondering about this.
What is the biodegradability (or recyclability) of these cans and the chemicals in them? Is this just one more "convenience good" for people to use and toss away?
A hundred CDs won't take long. I've got iTunes set so that when I insert a CD, it automatically rips it, catalogs it, then ejects the disc. It can even do this in the background while I work. I've got nearly 200 ripped this way, and it wasn't a chore.
The real problem is the LP and cassette tapes I have which are out of print, and have never been produced as CDs. Sure, I can hook up my computer to a stereo and record the music directly, then convert it to MP3. I've done this for a few choice albums. But the process is extremely intensive: either you stop it manually after each song so you can save the recorded file, or you record the whole album to a single audio file and then chop it up in a music editor. Both are long. I usually opt for the latter approach because I can do the slicing anytime; the important thing is to get it into the computer.
I wish there was software that could take a long audio stream of manys songs, let you set breakpoints along the sequence, then automatically save each song to a seperate file. Kind of like an audio version of ImageReady's "slices". Does such a thing exist?
I haven't seen the data, just the WIRED article, but we should have a few questions about the research and the conclusions. How do percentages compare to total numbers? How were the results "randomly selected"? Were location, demographics or time of day taken into account? Maybe more people are surfing from their work, where porn is blocked by firewalls or would be deemed socially unacceptable. Maybe more children are online. Maybe more low-income people are online. Are AltaVista users really representative of the entire Internet population, or was it just the handiest data source? According to this, this and this, AltaVista has barely any search engine market share left. Could AltaVista users simply be more intent on more information-savvy results rather than porn, simply because they're only trying AltaVista after being not fully satisfied with results elsewhere? (...and porn users can get their fill elsewhere?)
And, without studying other search engines, you cannot say that all people are taking less than five minutes, and only looking at the first two pages of results. Maybe that's because AltaVista's results and interface suck, compared to Google and others.
The best these researchers can really say is, "This suggests further research."
Have you actually seen the new iMac G5? There are quite a few items you can replace yourself if you want -- with an amazing level of ease. As Macintouch said, "With the iMac G5, Apple has written a new chapter in computer accessibility. You simply lay it face-down on a flat surface covered with a cotton cloth, unscrew three captive Phillips-head screws, and tilt off the back with its integral stand. You then have complete, unfettered access to the entire computer, and it's very easy to add an AirPort card or upgrade memory. The hard drive is right there, too, along with the rest of the components. Apple seems to be setting up a new service system that encourages customers to do many of their own repairs."
You can't upgrade the processor (well, not yet -- look out for third parties to figure it out, like they always do) but right out of the box, you can upgrade most everything that you might want to upgrade.
"To adopt Macs we must hire at least three [admins] to keep things going."
For one Mac? Or for hundreds of Macs? Real world example of Mac support costs: throughout the 1990's, I worked as a half-time Mac support person on a college campus with around 80 Macs (OS 8 and 9, no X out yet). That's 20 hours per week supporting 80 computers (about a third laptops), or roughly 15 minutes per week (to average the numbers. At the time there were about 350 Windows PCs (all Windows 95 and 98) on the same campus, with four full-time staff and five half-time college students to support them. That's 260 hours per week for 350 PCs, or 40 minutes per week (average). And these numbers assume that a full work week is 40 hours, but most of the PC guys (and a gal) routinely worked 50 or 60 hours, whereas I stuck to 20 hours almost every week. Furthermore, our Macs had a much lower turnover rate (e.g. we replaced Macs every 3-4 years instead of 2-3 years). This isn't because of some kind of purchasing bias from the IT department; replacements were generally ordered as requested by faculty and staff.
However, if you really want to inflate your Mac support costs, have a Windows support technician try to fix a Mac. He'll take ten times longer than a Mac guy because he won't know what the hell he's doing. And it will still be broken when he's done.
Another form of protesting the Republican National Convention: Joshua Kinberg's Bikes Against Bush, which allows you to type in a text message on his web site and have it spray-painted (well, spray-chalked) directly on the streets of New York via his wireless computerized pedal-powered spray-painting bicycle.
Uh... in my neck of the woods (upstate NY), there aren't many deals at all... AT&T is among the cheapest if you factor in total packages (local, regional, long distance). Maybe your area has better deals, but don't speak for us all.
At least for illustrators, Alias SketchBook Pro is a godsend. I don't use it myself, but I've spent the last six months doing Tablet PC UI research for Microsoft, and the people who are most passionate about these computers are professional illustrators and artists. Unfortunately that's not MS's primary target audience, but hey....
Sure, a dummy email address will keep YOU from getting spam, but you may actually be dumping the problem in someone else's lap. Even if it's not a valid email address, it may still be taxing the bandwidth and SMTP processing time at that domain -- so it's costing money and/or time to somebody.
What you really need is a kick-ass email control system (akin to disposable addresses, but much more powerful), like this.