We're stuck because we foolishly delegated the future to the government. At the time it sort of made sense, because it cost billions to get off the planet. But now it only costs millions. It's time to take space into our own hands.
If you are a contractor, and your contract states to make it IE-only, then you should do as you are told and contracted to.
My point is that the contract in all probability does NOT state that. Rather, it probably says "IE support only," which is a much different thing.
And since adding support for Industry Standards(tm) (HTML/CSS) ought to be your *starting* point, getting the site to work with all standards conforming browsers (Firefox, Konqueror, Opera, Safari, etc) should be a no-brainer.
If you are a contractor, never do work for free unless you are clearly getting something in return.
Two comments. First, all you contractors bitching about the poor economy because you can't get a contract, need to stop and consider why you're not getting calls from your prior clients. It might be because you're not giving your clients that extra effort (work for free). I can understand waged employees doing this, but not independent contractors.
Second, have you stopped to consider that making a site IE-only might be MORE WORK that making it standards compliant?
Are you the contractor? Then just do it! Make the application browser neutral! It's a no brainer. I seriously doubt your contract will have anything to forbid cross-browser functionality. So make sure the site/app works 100% in IE, then make it work in Opera, Safari, Konqueror, etc.
There's a world of difference between "Must work with IE" and "must work only with IE." Yes, I know that sounds blasphemous to most web developers, but it's true.
p.s. If, however, they are deliberately specifying that it must not work in any other browser, then let a congressman know. Government agencies should not be naming specific products in their specifications.
What would a typical company need specialized Windows drivers for?
I think that's your problem, you're assuming all companies fit the profile of the mythical "typical".
We wanted a Windows device driver developer because we produce embedded medical imaging systems. Our systems have from two to ten specialized boards. One of our platforms uses WinXP Embedded. Thus the need. While I personally think the choice of Windows a very poor one for this application, the fact remains that we would have needed device drivers even if we had went with vxWorks, LynxOS, QNX, Linux or NetBSD.
I'm not talking about scientists giving opinions on science related policies, but rather on scientists giving opinions on purely political policies.
Ever hear of the Union of Concerned Scientists? While many of their positions are environment related (and thus within the purview of a subset of their members), they unfortunately have a tendency to make pronouncements on purely social and political issues.
Why is it acceptable to poke fun at conservatives in the original GOOFUS and GALLANT post, but not okay for someone to do the same with regards to liberals? Do you realize how stupid your double standard makes you look?
You're suggesting that conservatives are incapable of being scientists?
Not in the least! It was giving a humorously exaggerated response to the humorously exaggerated grandparent post. But I keep forgetting that liberals have no sense of humor. My apologies.
By any chance did that student happen to go to highschool in Kansas? Chuckle.
Oh wait! Liberals DO have a sense of humour! Unfortunately it's limited to tired stereotypes of conservatives and rural Americans.
He probably flunked that 'conservative' student for being illogical.
Probably so. But that doesn't mean that the student was illogical, only that the professor believed he was. I've seen this stuff happen first hand.
We all believe in our own beliefs. That's why they're called "beliefs". It doesn't matter if we're liberal, conservative, socialist or libertarian, we objectively believe that our ideologies are correct. Thus, when a professor encounters a student who disagrees with him ideologically, most will percieve the student to be illogical.
Some professors will debate the student in an effort to "convert" him. Others will challenge the student in the hope that at least his critical thinking skills will get a workout. But unfortunately there are some that will simply mark down the student in their gradebook.
When I built my current system, two years old now, I was unable to find any Linux distro that would install on it. Frankly I was shocked. FreeBSD had no trouble with my SATA drives. None at all. Which is the opposite one would expect reading the Slashdot FUD.
Whenever I inquired in a help forum about how to install Linux on a SATA drive, I was always given a convoluted sequence of steps to negotiate. It wasn't the kernel's fault, because the kernel had SATA support. It was the distros who decided that no one needed SATA on the install CD! The situation has greatly improved, but one still finds commercial distros without SATA support on the install media.
If it's not mankind, then upon whom will your policies be imposed? If mankind's behavior is not causing the global warming, then how will policies intended to alter mankind's behavior do any good? The mere fact that you mentioned policies the way you did implies that you assumed mankind was at fault.
GOOFUS has never stepped foot outside his ivory tower, and has never had a conservative colleague in fifteen years, though he did have a conservative student two years ago (which he flunked). The last non-academic job he ever held was selling candy for high school band, but it was is mom who actually sold the candy. He's never taken one class in economics, but that doesn't stop him from proposing extreme radical economic policies.
GALLANT doesn't get invited to parties where they serve brie and gamay noir.
You seem to be assuming that mankind is the cause of global warming. History shows that the climate warms then cools then warms then cools. All without mankind's assistance.
Actually I'm not the guy hiring. I'm just the guy hoping they hire someone soon because I'm doing the work of three people.
But it's not just DICOM. We're finding it hard filling most development positions. Just finding an experienced Windows drivers developer proved to be a nightmare. People had taken classes, but no one was experienced. After six months we gave up. Do NOT tell me that's too specialized!
"DICOM" is specific, but not overly specific. If you're in the medical industry, it's very common. My point was that we can't find a qualified DICOM programmer. Not because there aren't any, but because they're all employed. Instead we get a whole bunch of yahoos with no experience in anything claiming they could learn it in week.
Brzzzt! And thus we learn the hazards of quicky introductions to complex domains. If you saw how thick the DICOM specification is you wouldn't be so smug.
I'm looking for a DICOM developer with five years experience. I'm not getting many hits. Maybe those hordes of unemployed software engineers everyone keeps talking about is a myth.
The scary part is that he says he'll be seeing "action" with the penguin. Sticking a Fleshlight(tm) in a plushy Tux wasn't one of the hacks mentioned in the new O'Reilly book...
Except that there are a lot of folks that don't -want- their OSS work to be commercialized by anyone else
Yet these same people have no problem with people commercializing their code if it's under the GPL! As evidence I point to the thunderous applause this ass received when he suggested commercial Solaris be put under the GPL.
I can vaguely understand why some weekend hobbyist wouldn't want the code he shared with his neighbor commercialized, but I cannot understand why people think putting commercial code under the BSD license would be a bad thing. Other than Sun, the FSF, and a few people still living in their parents' basement, who would bitch about a BSD licensed Solaris?
Slashdot Mirror
We're stuck because we foolishly delegated the future to the government. At the time it sort of made sense, because it cost billions to get off the planet. But now it only costs millions. It's time to take space into our own hands.
If you are a contractor, and your contract states to make it IE-only, then you should do as you are told and contracted to.
My point is that the contract in all probability does NOT state that. Rather, it probably says "IE support only," which is a much different thing.
And since adding support for Industry Standards(tm) (HTML/CSS) ought to be your *starting* point, getting the site to work with all standards conforming browsers (Firefox, Konqueror, Opera, Safari, etc) should be a no-brainer.
If you are a contractor, never do work for free unless you are clearly getting something in return.
Two comments. First, all you contractors bitching about the poor economy because you can't get a contract, need to stop and consider why you're not getting calls from your prior clients. It might be because you're not giving your clients that extra effort (work for free). I can understand waged employees doing this, but not independent contractors.
Second, have you stopped to consider that making a site IE-only might be MORE WORK that making it standards compliant?
- the cars are smaller
- they're more aerodynamic
- they probably use special low rolling friction tires
- etc.
I drive a Honda Civic. It's identical in size, aerodynamics and tires to the Honda Civic Hybrid.
Are you the contractor? Then just do it! Make the application browser neutral! It's a no brainer. I seriously doubt your contract will have anything to forbid cross-browser functionality. So make sure the site/app works 100% in IE, then make it work in Opera, Safari, Konqueror, etc.
There's a world of difference between "Must work with IE" and "must work only with IE." Yes, I know that sounds blasphemous to most web developers, but it's true.
p.s. If, however, they are deliberately specifying that it must not work in any other browser, then let a congressman know. Government agencies should not be naming specific products in their specifications.
You do understand that hybrids have batteries in them? That it's the batteries that give them higher MPGs?
Who the fuck modded this insightful? "Funny" it might be in a stupid juvenile way, but definitely not "insightful". Sigh.
If it's so squeaky clean, then what the hell are you doing polluting with a hybrid? Dump it and get a 100% electric vehicle!
What would a typical company need specialized Windows drivers for?
I think that's your problem, you're assuming all companies fit the profile of the mythical "typical".
We wanted a Windows device driver developer because we produce embedded medical imaging systems. Our systems have from two to ten specialized boards. One of our platforms uses WinXP Embedded. Thus the need. While I personally think the choice of Windows a very poor one for this application, the fact remains that we would have needed device drivers even if we had went with vxWorks, LynxOS, QNX, Linux or NetBSD.
I'm not talking about scientists giving opinions on science related policies, but rather on scientists giving opinions on purely political policies.
Ever hear of the Union of Concerned Scientists? While many of their positions are environment related (and thus within the purview of a subset of their members), they unfortunately have a tendency to make pronouncements on purely social and political issues.
HAS NO ONE READ THE GREAT GRANDPARENT POST?!?!
Why is it acceptable to poke fun at conservatives in the original GOOFUS and GALLANT post, but not okay for someone to do the same with regards to liberals? Do you realize how stupid your double standard makes you look?
You're suggesting that conservatives are incapable of being scientists?
Not in the least! It was giving a humorously exaggerated response to the humorously exaggerated grandparent post. But I keep forgetting that liberals have no sense of humor. My apologies.
By any chance did that student happen to go to highschool in Kansas? Chuckle.
Oh wait! Liberals DO have a sense of humour! Unfortunately it's limited to tired stereotypes of conservatives and rural Americans.
He probably flunked that 'conservative' student for being illogical.
Probably so. But that doesn't mean that the student was illogical, only that the professor believed he was. I've seen this stuff happen first hand.
We all believe in our own beliefs. That's why they're called "beliefs". It doesn't matter if we're liberal, conservative, socialist or libertarian, we objectively believe that our ideologies are correct. Thus, when a professor encounters a student who disagrees with him ideologically, most will percieve the student to be illogical.
Some professors will debate the student in an effort to "convert" him. Others will challenge the student in the hope that at least his critical thinking skills will get a workout. But unfortunately there are some that will simply mark down the student in their gradebook.
When I built my current system, two years old now, I was unable to find any Linux distro that would install on it. Frankly I was shocked. FreeBSD had no trouble with my SATA drives. None at all. Which is the opposite one would expect reading the Slashdot FUD.
Whenever I inquired in a help forum about how to install Linux on a SATA drive, I was always given a convoluted sequence of steps to negotiate. It wasn't the kernel's fault, because the kernel had SATA support. It was the distros who decided that no one needed SATA on the install CD! The situation has greatly improved, but one still finds commercial distros without SATA support on the install media.
I said nothing of the sort. Why do you think a scientist's knowledge of climatology is relevant to his opinions about the economy?
p.s. Why can the GP poke fun at conservatives, but no one is allowed to poke fun at liberals?
If it's not mankind, then upon whom will your policies be imposed? If mankind's behavior is not causing the global warming, then how will policies intended to alter mankind's behavior do any good? The mere fact that you mentioned policies the way you did implies that you assumed mankind was at fault.
We had a major ice age less than 15,000 years ago. We had a mini age less than 1,000 years ago. What is this "millions of years" you speak of?
GOOFUS has never stepped foot outside his ivory tower, and has never had a conservative colleague in fifteen years, though he did have a conservative student two years ago (which he flunked). The last non-academic job he ever held was selling candy for high school band, but it was is mom who actually sold the candy. He's never taken one class in economics, but that doesn't stop him from proposing extreme radical economic policies.
GALLANT doesn't get invited to parties where they serve brie and gamay noir.
You seem to be assuming that mankind is the cause of global warming. History shows that the climate warms then cools then warms then cools. All without mankind's assistance.
Actually I'm not the guy hiring. I'm just the guy hoping they hire someone soon because I'm doing the work of three people.
But it's not just DICOM. We're finding it hard filling most development positions. Just finding an experienced Windows drivers developer proved to be a nightmare. People had taken classes, but no one was experienced. After six months we gave up. Do NOT tell me that's too specialized!
"DICOM" is specific, but not overly specific. If you're in the medical industry, it's very common. My point was that we can't find a qualified DICOM programmer. Not because there aren't any, but because they're all employed. Instead we get a whole bunch of yahoos with no experience in anything claiming they could learn it in week.
Brzzzt! And thus we learn the hazards of quicky introductions to complex domains. If you saw how thick the DICOM specification is you wouldn't be so smug.
Use KPDF then. Sheesh.
I'm looking for a DICOM developer with five years experience. I'm not getting many hits. Maybe those hordes of unemployed software engineers everyone keeps talking about is a myth.
The scary part is that he says he'll be seeing "action" with the penguin. Sticking a Fleshlight(tm) in a plushy Tux wasn't one of the hacks mentioned in the new O'Reilly book...
Except that there are a lot of folks that don't -want- their OSS work to be commercialized by anyone else
Yet these same people have no problem with people commercializing their code if it's under the GPL! As evidence I point to the thunderous applause this ass received when he suggested commercial Solaris be put under the GPL.
I can vaguely understand why some weekend hobbyist wouldn't want the code he shared with his neighbor commercialized, but I cannot understand why people think putting commercial code under the BSD license would be a bad thing. Other than Sun, the FSF, and a few people still living in their parents' basement, who would bitch about a BSD licensed Solaris?
Oh, that's right! Martin Fink of HP!