One point I see made constantly (wonder how many MS shills there are out there) is the concern and finger pointing at OpenOffice about ensuring smooth interoperability and compatibility with Office documents. This is frustrating.
First (but not foremost) in my opinion the sooner "compatibility with Microsoft" is dropped as the IT yardstick (really it is just a canard), the better. As posted in previous/. articles there are other and emerging standards. The other standards aren't necessarily better (since that's an esoteric discussion unto itself anyway), but I can think of one that in the long run if adopted hints at greater interoperability than seen in a long time.
Second (and foremost AFIC), I've posted on this point many times (hmmm, time to start keeping a list of links), there really isn't such a thing as Microsoft and Office interoperability and compatibility. It's time to push back and start pointing that out to the puff-piece MS standard bearers. How many times have you wasted valuable time at a meeting while attendees share paper copies of the pre-distributed incompatible (with their version of WORD) Word documents? If you don't remember, you're not trying.
It's just not OpenOffice's fault anymore, and it's time to start defending it. I know it's a long shot. I know it's a long haul. And I know I'm getting modded troll and flamebait.
I was promoted and promoted, given many salary raises above and beyond, and many bonuses for work above and beyond. While I never asked for my six-figure salary, it was nice to have cuz I didn't have to worry much about financial woes.
Then a small company merged with ours, essentially swaggered in, a (allegedly) corrupt CEO (allegedly) cooked the books, or (allegedly) ordered them cooked, we went $35B in debt, our stock went from $54 to $2 (yes, 1/27th!), and the security unraveled.
No problem, that salary would come in handy now... until some British chick came in, one week on a conference call told us all to get approval before ordering office supplies and in a month or so we would look at our financial "situation".
Two weeks later 1/5 of us did the perp walk... Lost my job, lost the chance to finish the 3 years to full pension (after 21 years with this company). And, finally finding out not many companies want to interview someone that old, or making that much money... Doesn't matter what you've done, doesn't matter how good you are, if you can't even get the interview, salaries you made are only relevant in one way. Bitter? Yeah. Get over it? Yeah, but it's not easy.
A blessing in disguise, I'm now a completely independent software developer and stand to make more than I ever did working for d'man. But a lesson learned. Don't consider your salary in and of itself. Consider the ethics and environment of the company that may screw you (my sense is there aren't many out there anymore that won't.)
Some pretty good long-standing beefs listed on that blog -- beefs I've never seen addressed. (Kind of like a recent article I saw talking about cell-phones, and that consumers would much prefer seeing the cell-phone issues and problems addressed before the crap like cameras, mp3 players, video recorders, etc. get incorporated into the "phones".)
Off the top of my head I can add three that drive me crazy:
In Windows I always define my task bar to autohide. Typically I have it to the side of the screen, wide enough so when I mouse over it pops out wide enough for meaningful text to show what tasks really are. But it drives me freaking crazy when events trigger auto-popout of the task bar, often right under my keyboard, or mouse and I end up typing something, hitting enter and triggering something I didn't want, or just plain obscuring something I'm trying to see. (It's so annoying when the network gets flaky and apps that disconnect and re-connect (gaim, "hello (Picasa)", et. al.) proudly interrupt what you're doing to announce they've reconnected for you. Fuck you. I get it! (I had lunch with a best buddy and complained about that task bar behavior, and asked how to disable it -- figured he'd be the one to ask. He rubbed his chin for a second and said, "Hmmm, that's a good idea, I don't have a clue how to disable that!)
Meaningless jargon in messages. (this was addressed in the blog.) I got a worried e-mail from my Mom -- she was trying to start "gaim", and it kept giving her a dialog message, "An instance of gaim is already running". What the fuck? Why do we give computerese like "instance" to lay people? I can think of a few more meaningful messages than that off the top of my head that would let her proceed with confidence.
Cutesy tooltips. It's no end annoying when I have new apps installed, and the "START" menu in XP puts up the "new programs installed" tooltip, obscuring the "logoff" or "turn off computer" button I'm really trying to get to.
Yes, we're a LONG way off from interfaces that are easy to use and that make sense to the average user.
From the article: With four gray levels, the monochrome, 5-inch QVGA (320 pixels x 240 pixels) display provides paper-like viewing comfort with a high contrast ratio for reading-intensive applications, including text, graphics, and electronic maps.
This is the type of screen resolution for my Digital Reader, the resolution that made me send it back the day I got it. There's nothing paper-like about reading dot-matrix like resolutions. The eye doesn't adapt but instead becomes increasingly fatigued.
This technology may have some application for computer-like applications. I was hoping for e-books. This screen resolution won't cut that....
Microsoft's Yates said the company agrees with the adoption of XML but does not agree that the solution to "public records management is to force a single, less functional document format on all state agencies."
These articles are delicious with irony. I sometimes find it difficult to believe these are real! Do any of the Microsoft PR people ever sit down and read statements they've made?
Anyway, so now Microsoft thinks it knows best what constitutes (irony) the best solution for a government. Certainly Microsoft knows better than any company about ..., force a single, less functional document format....
Of course the obvious solution (and I'm surprised Microsoft hasn't figured this out, though we may see this in the next article) is for Microsoft to purchase Massechussets and force their document format by fiat. With that approach they get the convenient side effect of being able to foist the format on the state's populus by law.
Thanks for the tip. This has some great classical music, right out of the gate! I'm downloading my first CD right now!
The site is: Magnatune! Even if you don't think their selection is good enough (translation, doesn't have Hilary, Britney, et. al.?), if you like sampling new artists, this is a good place to look, and I love the business model. As the parent posted, read the founder's philosophy and business model.
I was sorry to see your post get mod'ed troll, hardly seems appropriate. You make interesting points whether or not I agree with them. Just thought I'd add my proxy mod to "interesting". (at the risk/guarantee of getting "offtopic'ed" myself.)
Re:Put aside the Microsoft bashing for a second...
on
Balmer Vows to Kill Google
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Kai Fu-Lee was an important executive at Microsoft and was a key resource on their expansion into China.
So? Important executives leave companies all the time.
Even before quitting at Microsoft, Kai Fu-Lee was working secretly for Google by sending them Microsoft documents. Google admits this, but their defense is that it was public information anyway.
The article doesn't say that. It says Microsoft alleges Fu-Lee sent Microsoft documents. Regardless, there is no statement in the article and no evidence I've seen in any articles about this squabble the Fu-Lee "worked" for Google secretly or otherwise while still at Microsoft. How crazy would that be aside from the already present risk of a non-compete clause in his existing Microsoft agreement?
Kai Fu-Lee had an employment contract with Microsoft that Google conspired with Lee to violate. At least two violations occurred including his non-compete agreement and working against the company you're working for while you're working for it.
Again, two alleged violations occurred. As for non-compete clauses, there is high suspicion in the industry and in the courts these types of agreements are even legal.
A judge already ruled preliminarily in Microsoft's favor, stating that Lee could not do the duties at Google he was hired to do.
Getting the preliminary injunction in cases like this is pretty standard procedure. No judge is going to allow a potential violation of a contract (or crime) be committed is it can be checked first. This is not unusual. I don't know what the final result will be here, but I'm guessing Fu-Lee will prevail.
I'm really a little confused by this whole article on so many levels, but let me start with the opening paragraph:
Internet Explorer hides nothing from police and other investigators who examine PCs to discover which sites the user has visited. They know the location of the IE browser cache, cookie files and history, and they know how to read those files. Also, popular forensics tools can help out.
From that opening I prepared to be read the litany of tricks and subterfuges used by Firefox and Opera to put investigators off the hot trail of criminals. Alas, nowhere in the remaining article is there any indication or hint of any "hiding" of evidence from investigators.
Are the investigators of the world so dumb, or so lazy? Neither is tenable, unless you're a criminal.
Also from the article: Furthermore, forensics software may not support the Web browsers..... To quote my factory-working buddies from post-high-school days, "Un-fucking-believable!" Are software vendors churning out software that weak? Are they that dumb, or lazy? Neither is tenable!
I started out looking at the article thinking it had to be some kind of hoax. I pray eventually this is what this turns out to be.
it found that Linux is 40% less expensive than a comparable
x86-based Windows server and 54% less than a comparable Sparc-based Solaris server.
The Linux server's costs were $40,149, compared with $67,559 for Windows and $86,478 for Solaris.
I am not surprised at linux's lower cost, I am surprised Solaris was so high. Other than
Sun's high licensing costs I'm at a loss on why Solaris would be so much higher. I've read other studies and I
tend to find them credible that one of the biggest cost-savings in TCO is the manageability of a unix-like system
vs the Windows GUI approach. I've seen narratives where good unix administrators can sometimes manage at least twice
as many systems as good Windows administrators, sometimes more. This is largely because of the simplicity
embedded in the unix complexity (one of the biggest complaints I see about unix is its "too-hard" nature,
but when mastered my experience has been you can script and automate so many unexpected scenarios easily,
something not so readily available in Windows).
The second surprise for me, also from the article:
"second-stage" benefits that some companies are experiencing by implementing Linux.
Second-stage benefits expand upon initial benefits such as lower hardware and licensing costs to include
the ability to consolidate server workloads, reduce IT hardware upgrade costs, and attract new IT workers
interested in open source. The Pund-IT report, titled "Beyond TCO--The Unanticipated Second Stage Benefits
Of Linux," indicates that "Linux is enormously popular among IT staff members, many of whom are at the
beginning of their careers, as well as with IT educators in universities and technical institutions worldwide."
It's encouraging to note linux is enormously popular among IT staff. Maybe unix and linux
have more purchase on the IT world than we thought. I'd resigned my professional life to watching the MS juggernaut
conquer the technology world but maybe the unix paradigm has legs! (There are other equally
interesting "better" architectures, (Be, Plan 9) but probably are in the wrong place at the wrong time to gain much
mindshare.)
(As an aside, have you ever noticed, the admin energies for Windows' environments goes to keeping the system
running in as stable a manner as possible, while admin energies for unix's go to extending and enhancing the
systems' performance, sometimes in elegantly exotic ways? Just my $.02)
In the posts here I see a lot of back-and-forth with some holding fast to the notion staying with MS Office is the prudent thing to do for various reasons including:
MS Office can produce PDF docs
MS Office docs can be viewed and printed using the free Microsoft Viewer software
Probably the simplest solution is to Save As... RTF.
(bullets borrowed from Donny Smith(567043))
From personal experience I think the most important factor is getting out of MS' talons and whimsical changes to their own formats. I've posted about this before.
I've actually been in business meetings which couldn't not get started on time because attendees had to sort out getting copies of the agenda or memos which they'd actually received beforehand but were in formats incompatible with their version of MS Office! This, ostensibly at one company using tools to help conduct business. Were this a one-time anecdote would be one thing, but I encountered this scenario many times. (There are grooves in my eye-sockets from so many eyerolls waiting for business to proceed.)
OpenOffice may not offer the perfect solution, but any move away from unpredictable and untouchable formats brings hope to eventually working with technology that improves our productivity. (I shudder to mention the car analogy, but it's so fun: can you imagine a car industry with such an approach (or maybe it's the highway infrastructure)? Every year or so you find out some cars can't be driven on the highways because of some change it their design, blah, blah, blah.)
I know a lot of people think certification falls along the same lines as having a college degree. I disagree. Many if not most certificates are easily obtained. I've attended classes where others in the class barely attended but instead used the "trip" to vacation in the locale. Others clearly got through the week of training on sheer stamina but came away none-the-wiser.
I suppose (as I've seen in some of these posts) I could claim I'd done my due diligence by ensuring my candidates/employees were certified and point my fingers at them, or the certification bodies if they turned out to be duds.
A better way I think is the old fashioned way -- an in depth interview along subject lines germaine to the position being considered. Where I worked we used random questions from a set of questions collectively gathered from our team -- these questions were representative of the technology we used, the situations we encountered, and plans for future work. The only time we ended up with an employee of no use to ourselves was when after our screening process our selection was overridden by a PHB who felt he knew better. He didn't.
I'm sure 99 % /.'ers have better stories...
on
10 Computer Mishaps
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I have to agree with first posters... these aren't very good stories. But, thinking maybe it's phishing for better stories, I'll byte:
I once created an extremely complex script, crafted lovingly to do something at the time I'm sure I thought important. As always I incrememtally built and tested, assuring myself of one more self-anointed masterpiece. Finally, finished, as an afterthought...
I inserted a variable to point to a directory node below which I would clean up all of my work (even though I knew I had no need for the variable and would never tweak it). It was such a simple addition. No need to test.
Fired up the script, it ran a couple of seconds, I was prepared to enjoy the fruits of my labor. Hmmmm, I don't remember ANY of the test runs running so long. Why is the hard drive light flickering so much? And why still? And why so long?...
Yeah, the
rm -fr c:/$CleanupDir (I was using MKS Toolkit in a windows environment)
command worked perfectly. Except I defined the variable initially as: cleanupdir=dirname
So, everything was lost except for the frigging "masterpiece".
Undaunted, (I'm no idiot, golllll!), I calmly inserted the QIC backup tape with my prerun backup.
No, wait!, I'll not be caught with that error again! I quickly edited the only remaining file in my tree of files, the offending script and smugly fixed the rogue spelling. I hadn't been working in this industry this long without knowing how to take safeguards!
Now, twenty minutes later, my script fixed... my files restored... let's try this again. Yeah... something about the chronology of fixing the script, then restoring the broken version over it from the backup tape. At least I proved the error was replicatable. So, I am an idiot afterall!
disclaimer: this happened over ten years ago, so I'm a bit short on exact detail of the snafu, but it really did happen. And, even though I repeated my idiocy, the fact I had the backup tape at all with only the one error to fix in the script saved my butt... so not all was lost in the lunacy.
Yeah, this is a difficult balance to strike. I've worked in computers for over twenty years. Worked my way to nice money, nice reputation. My friends and family know I know computers and know their questions for help on a scale of ten in difficulty typically register less than "one" in difficulty for me to solve. What they don't realize is it typically registers 6+ in annoyance on a scale of ten. Sigh. I'm sure it's similar to being a doctor and always having people ask for free advice/diagnostics.
I've resigned myself to spending more time than I want, but tried to allocate time such that I leave some for myself aiding and abetting others with their computers. If I don't they either think I am unforgivably rude (this may be close to truth many times), or I am imcompetent.
I have to agree there is a certain disdain from the linux community and it detracts from what linux and OSS should be about. If it helps, I also see the same disdain from "techies" in general towards those they consider non-tech savvy. Could just be manifest inferiority complex, could be only partially developed social skills, but it does seem to be widely present.
I've posted on this before, I don't claim there aren't stupid users/consumers of technology, but I do defend their right, even expectation not to have to know the difference between AMD and Intel, 64 bit and 32 bit architecture, etc. just to be able to type up a letter and e-mail.
I, too use both platforms for my work... I prefer linux 'cuz I love to twiddle bits, but for practical reasons I'm always using XP for some reason: some essential software to me only available in Windows (Hey, I can't port every app to linux that I need, though I've ported many); support (gotta know enough about Windows day to day to handle the calls from friends, family, etc.); and convenience.
A most satisfactory configuration for me is a dual-boot machine with linux typically the default, or a fast Windows box with VMWare running one or more of my favorite linux distros. (Word to the wise, one thing to consider about dual-booting a machine is the hassle you may get (I did!) if and when you have to have warranty work done on your machine).
I just watched the video and I couldn't understand a single word they said.
silicon based tributes to carbon based units
on
Video Tombstones
·
· Score: 1
I love technology but this isn't an application that comes close to making any sense to me. There's something organic about humanity, all through life, but especially in repose. Having some LCD (or any other screen technology) screams tackiness and lack of taste. I'm sure some see this as wonderful, but I've never seen any screen technology that degrades gracefully, and in short order.
But, for those who must...
Here lies... [popup] -- click here for $20 off on your next grave plot! [/popup]
I think this is sad, and a little ominous. I worked at a telco years ago, and managed to
fanagle a chat on the phone with Ritchie one time when a Bell worker was on site for some software
installations. Cool.
Anyway, in my arguments to encourage research into trying new ways of doing things, I always used
Bell Labs as my favorite example/reason why we should. Guess I won't have that anymore. Sigh.
What I fear most is the lack of research for research's sake. A lot of things we use today are
a direct or indirect result of companies allowing a certain amount of "what if" thinking and activity
to go on. Even better, some companies, like Bell Labs actually allocated specifically for that.
I don't think research in commercial context is really research at all and may even be counterproductive
in creating new and better technology (if commercial research into products were for "quality", would there
even be a Britney Spears?).
The last bastion I know of and trust is Google. They seem to be dedicated to the cause. But, they're young,
they're new, and they haven't had to deal with stockholders in bad times yet.
It's a social replacement. It's a way for non-social people to socialise.
It may be a way for non-social people to socialize, if you really want to call it that. But it's hardly, and never will be a social replacement for people who really like to socialize.
I've never really "got" games so I admit a personal bias, but I've never seen any evidence in wave after wave of new technology and new generations of games there is any indication games are a social replacement. I see the same people playing the same games in some variation, but I see no exodus of people-to-people socialization to interaction via gaming.
Yes, there will always be gamers and yes, I see a place for games and gamers, but it's a niche demographic. And, it's probably not worth a lot of investment of time to write games for the girlfriends of the gamers. Either they too like to play games or they don't. They're more likely to be happy finding a good TV show, a good magazine (or a crummy one for that matter), or a new boyfriend.
Slashdot Mirror
From the post: I know he is going to jump right in here and start shoveling out new ideas for Google
I usually associate new ideas and shoveling only with Microsoft.
Ducks!
From the article/post:
which may be the overstatement of the posting year.For those who don't want to go read the article, here's the summary:
wasn't REALLY counting on the pension, that much. But I deeply resented the motivation of the company... it was pretty clear what they were doing.
As for my 401K.... yeah, it lost about $290,000 in the stock price crash for the company. (and, yes, I was diversified).
Fucking criminals. (ex-CEO walked away with about $500M... nice takings)
One point I see made constantly (wonder how many MS shills there are out there) is the concern and finger pointing at OpenOffice about ensuring smooth interoperability and compatibility with Office documents. This is frustrating.
First (but not foremost) in my opinion the sooner "compatibility with Microsoft" is dropped as the IT yardstick (really it is just a canard), the better. As posted in previous /. articles there are other and emerging standards. The other standards aren't necessarily better (since that's an esoteric discussion unto itself anyway), but I can think of one that in the long run if adopted hints at greater interoperability than seen in a long time.
Second (and foremost AFIC), I've posted on this point many times (hmmm, time to start keeping a list of links), there really isn't such a thing as Microsoft and Office interoperability and compatibility. It's time to push back and start pointing that out to the puff-piece MS standard bearers. How many times have you wasted valuable time at a meeting while attendees share paper copies of the pre-distributed incompatible (with their version of WORD) Word documents? If you don't remember, you're not trying.
It's just not OpenOffice's fault anymore, and it's time to start defending it. I know it's a long shot. I know it's a long haul. And I know I'm getting modded troll and flamebait.
I was promoted and promoted, given many salary raises above and beyond, and many bonuses for work above and beyond. While I never asked for my six-figure salary, it was nice to have cuz I didn't have to worry much about financial woes.
Then a small company merged with ours, essentially swaggered in, a (allegedly) corrupt CEO (allegedly) cooked the books, or (allegedly) ordered them cooked, we went $35B in debt, our stock went from $54 to $2 (yes, 1/27th!), and the security unraveled.
No problem, that salary would come in handy now... until some British chick came in, one week on a conference call told us all to get approval before ordering office supplies and in a month or so we would look at our financial "situation".
Two weeks later 1/5 of us did the perp walk... Lost my job, lost the chance to finish the 3 years to full pension (after 21 years with this company). And, finally finding out not many companies want to interview someone that old, or making that much money... Doesn't matter what you've done, doesn't matter how good you are, if you can't even get the interview, salaries you made are only relevant in one way. Bitter? Yeah. Get over it? Yeah, but it's not easy.
A blessing in disguise, I'm now a completely independent software developer and stand to make more than I ever did working for d'man. But a lesson learned. Don't consider your salary in and of itself. Consider the ethics and environment of the company that may screw you (my sense is there aren't many out there anymore that won't.)
So the solution is to basically stop using a feature I want to use? Wow! Sounds like a Microsoft solution.
I don't like the task bar hanging around, that's why I hide it. I know my maximized apps will not overlap it, but there goes precious real estate.
Doctor! It hurts when I move my arm like this!... Then don't move your arm like that.
sigh
Some pretty good long-standing beefs listed on that blog -- beefs I've never seen addressed. (Kind of like a recent article I saw talking about cell-phones, and that consumers would much prefer seeing the cell-phone issues and problems addressed before the crap like cameras, mp3 players, video recorders, etc. get incorporated into the "phones".)
Off the top of my head I can add three that drive me crazy:
Yes, we're a LONG way off from interfaces that are easy to use and that make sense to the average user.
From the article: With four gray levels, the monochrome, 5-inch QVGA (320 pixels x 240 pixels) display provides paper-like viewing comfort with a high contrast ratio for reading-intensive applications, including text, graphics, and electronic maps.
This is the type of screen resolution for my Digital Reader, the resolution that made me send it back the day I got it. There's nothing paper-like about reading dot-matrix like resolutions. The eye doesn't adapt but instead becomes increasingly fatigued.
This technology may have some application for computer-like applications. I was hoping for e-books. This screen resolution won't cut that....
From the article:
These articles are delicious with irony. I sometimes find it difficult to believe these are real! Do any of the Microsoft PR people ever sit down and read statements they've made?
Anyway, so now Microsoft thinks it knows best what constitutes (irony) the best solution for a government. Certainly Microsoft knows better than any company about ..., force a single, less functional document format... .
Of course the obvious solution (and I'm surprised Microsoft hasn't figured this out, though we may see this in the next article) is for Microsoft to purchase Massechussets and force their document format by fiat. With that approach they get the convenient side effect of being able to foist the format on the state's populus by law.
Thanks for the tip. This has some great classical music, right out of the gate! I'm downloading my first CD right now!
The site is: Magnatune! Even if you don't think their selection is good enough (translation, doesn't have Hilary, Britney, et. al.?), if you like sampling new artists, this is a good place to look, and I love the business model. As the parent posted, read the founder's philosophy and business model.
I was sorry to see your post get mod'ed troll, hardly seems appropriate. You make interesting points whether or not I agree with them. Just thought I'd add my proxy mod to "interesting". (at the risk/guarantee of getting "offtopic'ed" myself.)
So? Important executives leave companies all the time.
The article doesn't say that. It says Microsoft alleges Fu-Lee sent Microsoft documents. Regardless, there is no statement in the article and no evidence I've seen in any articles about this squabble the Fu-Lee "worked" for Google secretly or otherwise while still at Microsoft. How crazy would that be aside from the already present risk of a non-compete clause in his existing Microsoft agreement?
Again, two alleged violations occurred. As for non-compete clauses, there is high suspicion in the industry and in the courts these types of agreements are even legal.
Getting the preliminary injunction in cases like this is pretty standard procedure. No judge is going to allow a potential violation of a contract (or crime) be committed is it can be checked first. This is not unusual. I don't know what the final result will be here, but I'm guessing Fu-Lee will prevail.
The day I have to start paying for anti-virus software to protect my fucking phone is the day I stop using cell phones... PERIOD.
I'm really a little confused by this whole article on so many levels, but let me start with the opening paragraph:
From that opening I prepared to be read the litany of tricks and subterfuges used by Firefox and Opera to put investigators off the hot trail of criminals. Alas, nowhere in the remaining article is there any indication or hint of any "hiding" of evidence from investigators.
Are the investigators of the world so dumb, or so lazy? Neither is tenable, unless you're a criminal.
Also from the article: Furthermore, forensics software may not support the Web browsers..... To quote my factory-working buddies from post-high-school days, "Un-fucking-believable!" Are software vendors churning out software that weak? Are they that dumb, or lazy? Neither is tenable!
I started out looking at the article thinking it had to be some kind of hoax. I pray eventually this is what this turns out to be.
From the article:
I am not surprised at linux's lower cost, I am surprised Solaris was so high. Other than Sun's high licensing costs I'm at a loss on why Solaris would be so much higher. I've read other studies and I tend to find them credible that one of the biggest cost-savings in TCO is the manageability of a unix-like system vs the Windows GUI approach. I've seen narratives where good unix administrators can sometimes manage at least twice as many systems as good Windows administrators, sometimes more. This is largely because of the simplicity embedded in the unix complexity (one of the biggest complaints I see about unix is its "too-hard" nature, but when mastered my experience has been you can script and automate so many unexpected scenarios easily, something not so readily available in Windows).
The second surprise for me, also from the article:
It's encouraging to note linux is enormously popular among IT staff. Maybe unix and linux have more purchase on the IT world than we thought. I'd resigned my professional life to watching the MS juggernaut conquer the technology world but maybe the unix paradigm has legs! (There are other equally interesting "better" architectures, (Be, Plan 9) but probably are in the wrong place at the wrong time to gain much mindshare.)
(As an aside, have you ever noticed, the admin energies for Windows' environments goes to keeping the system running in as stable a manner as possible, while admin energies for unix's go to extending and enhancing the systems' performance, sometimes in elegantly exotic ways? Just my $.02)
In the posts here I see a lot of back-and-forth with some holding fast to the notion staying with MS Office is the prudent thing to do for various reasons including:
(bullets borrowed from Donny Smith(567043))
From personal experience I think the most important factor is getting out of MS' talons and whimsical changes to their own formats. I've posted about this before.
I've actually been in business meetings which couldn't not get started on time because attendees had to sort out getting copies of the agenda or memos which they'd actually received beforehand but were in formats incompatible with their version of MS Office! This, ostensibly at one company using tools to help conduct business. Were this a one-time anecdote would be one thing, but I encountered this scenario many times. (There are grooves in my eye-sockets from so many eyerolls waiting for business to proceed.)
OpenOffice may not offer the perfect solution, but any move away from unpredictable and untouchable formats brings hope to eventually working with technology that improves our productivity. (I shudder to mention the car analogy, but it's so fun: can you imagine a car industry with such an approach (or maybe it's the highway infrastructure)? Every year or so you find out some cars can't be driven on the highways because of some change it their design, blah, blah, blah.)
I know a lot of people think certification falls along the same lines as having a college degree. I disagree. Many if not most certificates are easily obtained. I've attended classes where others in the class barely attended but instead used the "trip" to vacation in the locale. Others clearly got through the week of training on sheer stamina but came away none-the-wiser.
I suppose (as I've seen in some of these posts) I could claim I'd done my due diligence by ensuring my candidates/employees were certified and point my fingers at them, or the certification bodies if they turned out to be duds.
A better way I think is the old fashioned way -- an in depth interview along subject lines germaine to the position being considered. Where I worked we used random questions from a set of questions collectively gathered from our team -- these questions were representative of the technology we used, the situations we encountered, and plans for future work. The only time we ended up with an employee of no use to ourselves was when after our screening process our selection was overridden by a PHB who felt he knew better. He didn't.
I have to agree with first posters... these aren't very good stories. But, thinking maybe it's phishing for better stories, I'll byte:
I once created an extremely complex script, crafted lovingly to do something at the time I'm sure I thought important. As always I incrememtally built and tested, assuring myself of one more self-anointed masterpiece. Finally, finished, as an afterthought...
I inserted a variable to point to a directory node below which I would clean up all of my work (even though I knew I had no need for the variable and would never tweak it). It was such a simple addition. No need to test.
Fired up the script, it ran a couple of seconds, I was prepared to enjoy the fruits of my labor. Hmmmm, I don't remember ANY of the test runs running so long. Why is the hard drive light flickering so much? And why still? And why so long?...
Yeah, the
command worked perfectly. Except I defined the variable initially as: cleanupdir=dirname
So, everything was lost except for the frigging "masterpiece".
Undaunted, (I'm no idiot, golllll!), I calmly inserted the QIC backup tape with my prerun backup.
No, wait!, I'll not be caught with that error again! I quickly edited the only remaining file in my tree of files, the offending script and smugly fixed the rogue spelling. I hadn't been working in this industry this long without knowing how to take safeguards!
Now, twenty minutes later, my script fixed... my files restored... let's try this again. Yeah... something about the chronology of fixing the script, then restoring the broken version over it from the backup tape. At least I proved the error was replicatable. So, I am an idiot afterall!
disclaimer: this happened over ten years ago, so I'm a bit short on exact detail of the snafu, but it really did happen. And, even though I repeated my idiocy, the fact I had the backup tape at all with only the one error to fix in the script saved my butt... so not all was lost in the lunacy.
I find if you quadruple ROT13 encrypt your name you'll get a little bit more protection.
Yeah, this is a difficult balance to strike. I've worked in computers for over twenty years. Worked my way to nice money, nice reputation. My friends and family know I know computers and know their questions for help on a scale of ten in difficulty typically register less than "one" in difficulty for me to solve. What they don't realize is it typically registers 6+ in annoyance on a scale of ten. Sigh. I'm sure it's similar to being a doctor and always having people ask for free advice/diagnostics.
I've resigned myself to spending more time than I want, but tried to allocate time such that I leave some for myself aiding and abetting others with their computers. If I don't they either think I am unforgivably rude (this may be close to truth many times), or I am imcompetent.
[$.02]
I have to agree there is a certain disdain from the linux community and it detracts from what linux and OSS should be about. If it helps, I also see the same disdain from "techies" in general towards those they consider non-tech savvy. Could just be manifest inferiority complex, could be only partially developed social skills, but it does seem to be widely present.
I've posted on this before, I don't claim there aren't stupid users/consumers of technology, but I do defend their right, even expectation not to have to know the difference between AMD and Intel, 64 bit and 32 bit architecture, etc. just to be able to type up a letter and e-mail.
I, too use both platforms for my work... I prefer linux 'cuz I love to twiddle bits, but for practical reasons I'm always using XP for some reason: some essential software to me only available in Windows (Hey, I can't port every app to linux that I need, though I've ported many); support (gotta know enough about Windows day to day to handle the calls from friends, family, etc.); and convenience.
A most satisfactory configuration for me is a dual-boot machine with linux typically the default, or a fast Windows box with VMWare running one or more of my favorite linux distros. (Word to the wise, one thing to consider about dual-booting a machine is the hassle you may get (I did!) if and when you have to have warranty work done on your machine).
[/$.02]
I just watched the video and I couldn't understand a single word they said.
I love technology but this isn't an application that comes close to making any sense to me. There's something organic about humanity, all through life, but especially in repose. Having some LCD (or any other screen technology) screams tackiness and lack of taste. I'm sure some see this as wonderful, but I've never seen any screen technology that degrades gracefully, and in short order.
But, for those who must...
Here lies... [popup] -- click here for $20 off on your next grave plot! [/popup]
sigh
I think this is sad, and a little ominous. I worked at a telco years ago, and managed to fanagle a chat on the phone with Ritchie one time when a Bell worker was on site for some software installations. Cool.
Anyway, in my arguments to encourage research into trying new ways of doing things, I always used Bell Labs as my favorite example/reason why we should. Guess I won't have that anymore. Sigh.
What I fear most is the lack of research for research's sake. A lot of things we use today are a direct or indirect result of companies allowing a certain amount of "what if" thinking and activity to go on. Even better, some companies, like Bell Labs actually allocated specifically for that.
I don't think research in commercial context is really research at all and may even be counterproductive in creating new and better technology (if commercial research into products were for "quality", would there even be a Britney Spears?).
The last bastion I know of and trust is Google. They seem to be dedicated to the cause. But, they're young, they're new, and they haven't had to deal with stockholders in bad times yet.
From the post:
It may be a way for non-social people to socialize, if you really want to call it that. But it's hardly, and never will be a social replacement for people who really like to socialize.
I've never really "got" games so I admit a personal bias, but I've never seen any evidence in wave after wave of new technology and new generations of games there is any indication games are a social replacement. I see the same people playing the same games in some variation, but I see no exodus of people-to-people socialization to interaction via gaming.
Yes, there will always be gamers and yes, I see a place for games and gamers, but it's a niche demographic. And, it's probably not worth a lot of investment of time to write games for the girlfriends of the gamers. Either they too like to play games or they don't. They're more likely to be happy finding a good TV show, a good magazine (or a crummy one for that matter), or a new boyfriend.