Windows != "standards". And, by the time a 7th grader enters the work force, Windows will be less like the XP he's using now than Mandriva is like XP.
There are, of course, businesses that need some sort of proprietary, Windows-only software (e.g., Photoshop) but a spreadsheet is a spreadsheet, a word processer is a word processer. Each new version of Microsoft Word is less like the previous version or Word than that previous version was to Star Office.
Microsoft software in schools is a pitiful, ignorant waste of my tax money.
Exactly. It doesn't make a lot of sense to just teach elementary/middle school students soley about Microsoft technology (or any other single technology for that matter) because that technology will be WAY outdated when the student gets into the 'real world'.
Perhaps it would be better to expose those children to a variety of technologies (e.g., operating systems).
My 2 and a half year old daughter has no problems playing with a Barbie doll for a while, then moving on to a Care Bear, or a Weeble Wobble, or any other toy. You interface with each toy differently, and they each have their different features, but you can use ALL of them to play house.
Variety keeps their imagination going. Isn't that what we want with our children? It'll help them later in life to be more inventive instead of making everything (for example) be "just like Windows".
They'll also need to take a picture of you frowning, winking, blinking, dazed, sleeping, laughing, coughing, sneezing, etc, etc, etc.
Think of the overhead in the system when security checkpoints have to parse through 20+pictures for each of millions of citizens whenever someone passes in front of a security camera.
Exactly. So everyone is required to have a straight, expressionless face so their software can take your picture. Just smile at any security camera and bypass the system. It'll never know who you are:)
What did the architects of the Egyptian pyramids use?
I think bringing technology into schools is a good thing. You can still teach kids the basics (math, reading, writing, etc) on computers, and also plenty of new things as well.
I've often wondered this myself. If a vulnerability gets exposed, there are two options: the application (or OS) vendor can patch it, or antivirus vendors can put out a fix for it. Either option will take a certain amount of time. However, it should be the job of the software/OS vendor to fix their stuff.
If they don't want to or can't fix their own stuff, just don't use it. Why put a bandaid on it when you can just go with another vendor that is more proactive with their fixes? Or one that has their code configured properly in the first place?
Seems to the the admin account lets you do some pretty dangerous things without realizing they are dangerous. Like maybe run a script that installs a comprised version of a application.
This is different then ubuntu. In ubuntu you can not simply copy files from your desktop into/usr/local/bin and let anyone run them. You have to specify your password.
Running as an admin is OSX is not a good practice.
Running as an admin in any OS is not a good practice.
You can log in as root in Ubuntu. You just have to create a root password first. Either that or kill the X server and then 'sudo startx' from the console. You could also 'sudo bash' and then trash your system to your heart's content:)
I've never actually used OS X, but if it allows you, out of the box, to log in as an admin user (rather than simply escalating privileges on a per-process basis) then Ubuntu sounds better in that regard.
Yes, pump a bunch of taxpayer money into Federal prisons to provide entertainment, gyms, workout facilities, etc to the criminals. Do they really need all of that? Throw the criminals in 'the brig' with only the bare essentials for human survival (food, water, a place to sleep at night).
I suppose some people might actually live more comfortably in prison than in the real world.
Would you replace Oracle with PostgreSQL if "all" you had in house were Oracle gurus?
Sure I would, if PostgreSQL proved more beneficial to my business than Oracle in the long run. Those Oracle gurus should know enough about the system to be able to adapt that knowledge to a different, but somewhat similar, system. Maybe the gurus would need some additional training for the new technology.
There's no way you can start as a sysadmin without having the degree, but there are other ways. I'd suggest starting at a lower level with a company that will pay for your certs, get your MSCE, CCNE, etc and work your way up.
You shouldn't need a degree just to be a sysadmin. You might need to start at a lower level like you said, but while in that position, you may be able to show your coworkers, and more importantly management, that you "know your stuff" without getting a degree or other certifications.
In my current job, I've become known as "the Linux guy" because I developed a small script or two to perform automated software updates. My job isn't even Linux related.
I've had no educational training in Linux (including any certifications) but simply came up with a "Hey Linux can do that" solution to an existing problem and moved on from there.
My problem is the inverse one. I have a BSc and an MSc in Computer Science from a respectable scientific institute (app. 10% of our MSc graduates are recruited by Google each year), but I can't find a Software Developer position.
Alas, nobody wants to take in someone without experience in this economy - nobody wants to invest in the shaky future. I've seen many job listings with "Bachelor's degree a plus", but the experience dominates.
What about personal experience? E.g., managing your home network, or managing/reparing the PCs of family members for years, as opposed to on-the-job paid-for experience?
I've noticed the "needs experience" problem as well when I was looking for a job. Most of the job ads I found wanted someone with 2, 5, 10, or more years of experience and a "bachelor's degree or higher is a plus". So in order to get a job, one needs to have on-the-job experience. However, in order to get that experience, one must get a job. Seems like a Catch-22.
I think one good way to approach this is to start with a smaller job at a company you want to work for. You might want to be a network admin at Google, but maybe start with a data entry job or similar. Then when you're on the job, look for opportunities to 'show off' your networking skills. Word tends to travel fast when you're able to help a coworker with a computer problem or similar.
Management starts to see what you're capable of, it gets into your performance reviews, and that could open the door to better opportunities in the field leading to that network admin job.
From the company's view, that degree you may have from a university shows at least that you learned how to manage a computer network (or whatever the job is) on paper, but not necessarily in the real world. Get your foot in the door, and then show them what you're capable of doing.
The entire Ubuntu installation, configuration, and applying all updates takes less then 1/2 hr (no, I'm not exaggerating, try it) and is finished while Windows XP is still formatting the disk.
Absolutely. I play a windows-based MMORPG called Silkroad Online in Linux. About a month ago, I was trying to get Silkroad to run in Gentoo, but I was having difficulty.
So one morning, I decided to try Ubuntu. The whole process took about 90 minutes:
1. log into Gentoo
2. Browse to ubuntu.com
3. Download Ubuntu ISO
4. Burn Ubuntu ISO to a CD
5. Reboot to that CD
6. Install Ubuntu in a separate partition (keeping Gentoo)
7. Update Ubuntu
8. Install nVIDIA drivers
9. Install WINE
10. Configure WINE
11. Install Silkroad and update it.
12. Log into Silkroad.
Not a single reboot required. I know Windows would have taken a LOT longer with all the reboots and everything required.
Wouldn't all users of a NAT'd subnet be seen as having the same IP from twitter's standpoint? In that case, Twitter would think that the same user is creating multiple accounts when in reality it's hundreds of users at a university or Internet cafe for example.
Apply my right turn indicator and continue to proceed at my current speed while watching for a sufficiently large opening in traffic to my right. Perhaps add 1 or 2 mph to my speed, if there's only 6 more cars to pass.
He'll live. (And if he's on his way to the hospital, and someone won't live, he should've called for an ambulance, which has lights & sirens for just this sort of situation.)
That's assuming that someone in the right lane will be nice enough to let you in. Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't. I try to go that route myself, but it is often just easier to speed up and move over when I can.
As for the ambulance, at least where I live, it would probably take an ambulance just as long to get to my house as it would take me to deliver someone to the hospital.
I'll have to agree with Entropius here. Sometimes slowing down is not an option.
Picture driving on a 2 lane interstate in the passing lane. The right lane has a long line of cars and trucks ahead and behind you with no room to merge into them. You're passing the line of traffic, but slowly.
Suddenly you look in your rear view mirror and someone is closing in on you quickly, tailgating you, flashing his headlights at you. Again, there is no room in that long line of traffic to move over.
Do you just ignore the driver, pissing him off even more, making him more aggressive, slow down hoping to find a gap in traffic to merge into behind you, or speed up to 80+ to pass the final 6 or so cars ahead of you for a place to move over safely?
3) For fucks sake - where's the calculator? It's bad enough that I can't hover over the different parts of the start menu (or what ever it's called) and just see what's under there, drill down without it hiding all the other stuff because it 'page flipped' - but the calculator isn't called 'calculator'. It's called kcalc. And the movie player isn't called 'movie player'. It's called ICEwigga or something. And the music player isn't called 'music player' - it's called kude or some shit like that.
I agree that various Linux applications could have better names, but that's up to the software developer, not the OS.
Application names like "Movie Player" and "Calculator" are fine in Windows because those are Microsoft software (assuming you're talking about "Windows Movie Maker" and "Windows blahblah..." and the like. Install a third party app in Windows, like xmms (a media player) and it will be called xmms, not "media player".
If you write your own software application that can play CDs, why should Ubuntu (for example) force you to call it "CD Player" if you like a different name for your own software?
At least the more recent GUIs I've used have tool tips so when you hover over something like "ICEwigga" it would display a description that it is a "movie player".
Combine that with the fact that, at least in KDE, most applications in the K menu are categorized into "Internet", "Office" and the like, it's not so bad.
Silkroad Online (by Joymax) seems to work pretty well in this regard. It's free to download, and free to play. They have an item mall so you can buy items for your character if you so chooose. I see a TON of people in game buying things all the time.
I personally choose not to purchase anything since I usually don't have any extra cash. Any extra I do have goes to my wife and daughters.
Unfortunately though, Silkroad Online's Item Mall does provide items to make your character, or your character's weapons, stronger. So you can essentially pay to be stronger.
I've been thinking the same thing. I have two vehicles, both from 1998. My Subaru Legacy is rated about 24/28 MPG and my Ford Contour I believe is rated at 28/30 or so. I think that was about average for compact/midsize cars of that time. Seems to me in 10 years they could come up with a lot better than that.
I see a lot of car commercials now bragging about fuel efficient cars that get about 35 MPG, with hybrids (Prius) I think rated about 45+?
35 MPG doesn't seem like that much of an improvement over 10 years to me.
I frequently interview programmers, and having them take a short test (approx 30 minutes) and then discussing this with them in their interview is incredibly useful to determine their skillset.
I think that's a great idea, combining the test with a discussion of it afterwards. It can help to show what the candidate can do on their own, and also show how they handle the 'teamwork' aspect of discussing their solutions and possibly coming up with better alternatives.
The IT field is constantly changing. New technologies come out, old ones may resurface. I could spend 6-8 years getting my CS bachelor's and master's degrees, getting certifications through Cisco, Microsoft, CompTIA, (ISC)2, and by the time I get through all that and move into an entry level job, my skills may be out dated to some extent. I see nothing wrong with a little test.
If the test is garbage, perhaps that says something about the employer. If the test is decent, perhaps it would be best to understand why the test is being given, rather than think that it is 'insulting' and that the employer should just 'trust you' on all of your qualifications in an industry that is constantly changing.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of asshat managers who want their employees in the office.
Also, when you're not in front of the boss all the time, he doesn't really see your contribution, so when review time comes, you won't get the points that the folks who are there will.
That's the whole point of "telecommute home". You arrive at work and realize your laptop is home. Use your desktop computer that is sitting on your desk at the office to remote connect to the laptop at home. Then your boss can see you working.
Of course that won't work in areas where you can't install software like SSH clients, or the necessary ports are blocked.
I know very well that the enemies are humans too, and not just pixels in a game. I may not agree with all of the reasons my country goes to war, but I have every bit of respect for the men and women of our armed forces who risk their lives doing what they do to protect our country and our rights. I'm proud to be able to do whatever I can to help make their jobs easier, and perhaps safer.
Instead of looking at it as building tools and weapons for the Army to allow the Warfighter to kill people, why not look at it as building tools and weapons to save the Warfighter's life and give him or her a better chance to come home to family.
If a grenadier is out in the field, once he fires his first shot, he is a target. What's the first-hit success ratio for them? Give them a tool that will help them get that first shot successfully, and it will help a lot.
What about America's Army? The game has been out for a while, and has some great potential for training simulators. Integrate it into actual weapons, and it's even better:)
I think it is a great idea to have a unified UI for Linux. It can be overwhelming for a newcomer trying to transition to Linux, but knowing that there are hundreds of different distributions out there with different capabilities and sometimes different UIs.
The system can be set up, and often times already is, to offer alternative UIs if the user so chooses, but keep to a standard interface by default.
That way, once the user gets familiar enough with the system where he wants to explore and change settings, he can.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows != "standards". And, by the time a 7th grader enters the work force, Windows will be less like the XP he's using now than Mandriva is like XP.
There are, of course, businesses that need some sort of proprietary, Windows-only software (e.g., Photoshop) but a spreadsheet is a spreadsheet, a word processer is a word processer. Each new version of Microsoft Word is less like the previous version or Word than that previous version was to Star Office.
Microsoft software in schools is a pitiful, ignorant waste of my tax money.
Exactly. It doesn't make a lot of sense to just teach elementary/middle school students soley about Microsoft technology (or any other single technology for that matter) because that technology will be WAY outdated when the student gets into the 'real world'.
Perhaps it would be better to expose those children to a variety of technologies (e.g., operating systems).
My 2 and a half year old daughter has no problems playing with a Barbie doll for a while, then moving on to a Care Bear, or a Weeble Wobble, or any other toy. You interface with each toy differently, and they each have their different features, but you can use ALL of them to play house.
Variety keeps their imagination going. Isn't that what we want with our children? It'll help them later in life to be more inventive instead of making everything (for example) be "just like Windows".
They'll also need to take a picture of you frowning, winking, blinking, dazed, sleeping, laughing, coughing, sneezing, etc, etc, etc.
Think of the overhead in the system when security checkpoints have to parse through 20+pictures for each of millions of citizens whenever someone passes in front of a security camera.
Exactly. So everyone is required to have a straight, expressionless face so their software can take your picture. Just smile at any security camera and bypass the system. It'll never know who you are :)
What did the architects of the Egyptian pyramids use?
I think bringing technology into schools is a good thing. You can still teach kids the basics (math, reading, writing, etc) on computers, and also plenty of new things as well.
I've often wondered this myself. If a vulnerability gets exposed, there are two options: the application (or OS) vendor can patch it, or antivirus vendors can put out a fix for it. Either option will take a certain amount of time. However, it should be the job of the software/OS vendor to fix their stuff.
If they don't want to or can't fix their own stuff, just don't use it. Why put a bandaid on it when you can just go with another vendor that is more proactive with their fixes? Or one that has their code configured properly in the first place?
Seems to the the admin account lets you do some pretty dangerous things without realizing they are dangerous. Like maybe run a script that installs a comprised version of a application.
This is different then ubuntu. In ubuntu you can not simply copy files from your desktop into /usr/local/bin and let anyone run them. You have to specify your password.
Running as an admin is OSX is not a good practice.
Running as an admin in any OS is not a good practice.
You can log in as root in Ubuntu. You just have to create a root password first. Either that or kill the X server and then 'sudo startx' from the console. You could also 'sudo bash' and then trash your system to your heart's content :)
I've never actually used OS X, but if it allows you, out of the box, to log in as an admin user (rather than simply escalating privileges on a per-process basis) then Ubuntu sounds better in that regard.
Yes, pump a bunch of taxpayer money into Federal prisons to provide entertainment, gyms, workout facilities, etc to the criminals. Do they really need all of that? Throw the criminals in 'the brig' with only the bare essentials for human survival (food, water, a place to sleep at night).
I suppose some people might actually live more comfortably in prison than in the real world.
Would you replace Oracle with PostgreSQL if "all" you had in house were Oracle gurus?
Sure I would, if PostgreSQL proved more beneficial to my business than Oracle in the long run. Those Oracle gurus should know enough about the system to be able to adapt that knowledge to a different, but somewhat similar, system. Maybe the gurus would need some additional training for the new technology.
There's no way you can start as a sysadmin without having the degree, but there are other ways. I'd suggest starting at a lower level with a company that will pay for your certs, get your MSCE, CCNE, etc and work your way up.
You shouldn't need a degree just to be a sysadmin. You might need to start at a lower level like you said, but while in that position, you may be able to show your coworkers, and more importantly management, that you "know your stuff" without getting a degree or other certifications.
In my current job, I've become known as "the Linux guy" because I developed a small script or two to perform automated software updates. My job isn't even Linux related.
I've had no educational training in Linux (including any certifications) but simply came up with a "Hey Linux can do that" solution to an existing problem and moved on from there.
My problem is the inverse one. I have a BSc and an MSc in Computer Science from a respectable scientific institute (app. 10% of our MSc graduates are recruited by Google each year), but I can't find a Software Developer position. Alas, nobody wants to take in someone without experience in this economy - nobody wants to invest in the shaky future. I've seen many job listings with "Bachelor's degree a plus", but the experience dominates.
What about personal experience? E.g., managing your home network, or managing/reparing the PCs of family members for years, as opposed to on-the-job paid-for experience?
I've noticed the "needs experience" problem as well when I was looking for a job. Most of the job ads I found wanted someone with 2, 5, 10, or more years of experience and a "bachelor's degree or higher is a plus". So in order to get a job, one needs to have on-the-job experience. However, in order to get that experience, one must get a job. Seems like a Catch-22.
I think one good way to approach this is to start with a smaller job at a company you want to work for. You might want to be a network admin at Google, but maybe start with a data entry job or similar. Then when you're on the job, look for opportunities to 'show off' your networking skills. Word tends to travel fast when you're able to help a coworker with a computer problem or similar.
Management starts to see what you're capable of, it gets into your performance reviews, and that could open the door to better opportunities in the field leading to that network admin job. From the company's view, that degree you may have from a university shows at least that you learned how to manage a computer network (or whatever the job is) on paper, but not necessarily in the real world. Get your foot in the door, and then show them what you're capable of doing.
The entire Ubuntu installation, configuration, and applying all updates takes less then 1/2 hr (no, I'm not exaggerating, try it) and is finished while Windows XP is still formatting the disk.
Absolutely. I play a windows-based MMORPG called Silkroad Online in Linux. About a month ago, I was trying to get Silkroad to run in Gentoo, but I was having difficulty. So one morning, I decided to try Ubuntu. The whole process took about 90 minutes: 1. log into Gentoo 2. Browse to ubuntu.com 3. Download Ubuntu ISO 4. Burn Ubuntu ISO to a CD 5. Reboot to that CD 6. Install Ubuntu in a separate partition (keeping Gentoo) 7. Update Ubuntu 8. Install nVIDIA drivers 9. Install WINE 10. Configure WINE 11. Install Silkroad and update it. 12. Log into Silkroad. Not a single reboot required. I know Windows would have taken a LOT longer with all the reboots and everything required.
Wouldn't all users of a NAT'd subnet be seen as having the same IP from twitter's standpoint? In that case, Twitter would think that the same user is creating multiple accounts when in reality it's hundreds of users at a university or Internet cafe for example.
Apply my right turn indicator and continue to proceed at my current speed while watching for a sufficiently large opening in traffic to my right. Perhaps add 1 or 2 mph to my speed, if there's only 6 more cars to pass.
He'll live. (And if he's on his way to the hospital, and someone won't live, he should've called for an ambulance, which has lights & sirens for just this sort of situation.)
That's assuming that someone in the right lane will be nice enough to let you in. Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't. I try to go that route myself, but it is often just easier to speed up and move over when I can. As for the ambulance, at least where I live, it would probably take an ambulance just as long to get to my house as it would take me to deliver someone to the hospital.
I'll have to agree with Entropius here. Sometimes slowing down is not an option. Picture driving on a 2 lane interstate in the passing lane. The right lane has a long line of cars and trucks ahead and behind you with no room to merge into them. You're passing the line of traffic, but slowly. Suddenly you look in your rear view mirror and someone is closing in on you quickly, tailgating you, flashing his headlights at you. Again, there is no room in that long line of traffic to move over. Do you just ignore the driver, pissing him off even more, making him more aggressive, slow down hoping to find a gap in traffic to merge into behind you, or speed up to 80+ to pass the final 6 or so cars ahead of you for a place to move over safely?
3) For fucks sake - where's the calculator? It's bad enough that I can't hover over the different parts of the start menu (or what ever it's called) and just see what's under there, drill down without it hiding all the other stuff because it 'page flipped' - but the calculator isn't called 'calculator'. It's called kcalc. And the movie player isn't called 'movie player'. It's called ICEwigga or something. And the music player isn't called 'music player' - it's called kude or some shit like that.
I agree that various Linux applications could have better names, but that's up to the software developer, not the OS. Application names like "Movie Player" and "Calculator" are fine in Windows because those are Microsoft software (assuming you're talking about "Windows Movie Maker" and "Windows blahblah..." and the like. Install a third party app in Windows, like xmms (a media player) and it will be called xmms, not "media player". If you write your own software application that can play CDs, why should Ubuntu (for example) force you to call it "CD Player" if you like a different name for your own software? At least the more recent GUIs I've used have tool tips so when you hover over something like "ICEwigga" it would display a description that it is a "movie player". Combine that with the fact that, at least in KDE, most applications in the K menu are categorized into "Internet", "Office" and the like, it's not so bad.
Silkroad Online (by Joymax) seems to work pretty well in this regard. It's free to download, and free to play. They have an item mall so you can buy items for your character if you so chooose. I see a TON of people in game buying things all the time. I personally choose not to purchase anything since I usually don't have any extra cash. Any extra I do have goes to my wife and daughters. Unfortunately though, Silkroad Online's Item Mall does provide items to make your character, or your character's weapons, stronger. So you can essentially pay to be stronger.
I've been thinking the same thing. I have two vehicles, both from 1998. My Subaru Legacy is rated about 24/28 MPG and my Ford Contour I believe is rated at 28/30 or so. I think that was about average for compact/midsize cars of that time. Seems to me in 10 years they could come up with a lot better than that. I see a lot of car commercials now bragging about fuel efficient cars that get about 35 MPG, with hybrids (Prius) I think rated about 45+? 35 MPG doesn't seem like that much of an improvement over 10 years to me.
I think that's a great idea, combining the test with a discussion of it afterwards. It can help to show what the candidate can do on their own, and also show how they handle the 'teamwork' aspect of discussing their solutions and possibly coming up with better alternatives. The IT field is constantly changing. New technologies come out, old ones may resurface. I could spend 6-8 years getting my CS bachelor's and master's degrees, getting certifications through Cisco, Microsoft, CompTIA, (ISC)2, and by the time I get through all that and move into an entry level job, my skills may be out dated to some extent. I see nothing wrong with a little test. If the test is garbage, perhaps that says something about the employer. If the test is decent, perhaps it would be best to understand why the test is being given, rather than think that it is 'insulting' and that the employer should just 'trust you' on all of your qualifications in an industry that is constantly changing.
I had no idea you could use the WSAD buttons to browse comments. Nice :)
I'd like to see compiz and/or beryl on Windows. 3
Unfortunately, there are a lot of asshat managers who want their employees in the office.
Also, when you're not in front of the boss all the time, he doesn't really see your contribution, so when review time comes, you won't get the points that the folks who are there will.
That's the whole point of "telecommute home". You arrive at work and realize your laptop is home. Use your desktop computer that is sitting on your desk at the office to remote connect to the laptop at home. Then your boss can see you working. Of course that won't work in areas where you can't install software like SSH clients, or the necessary ports are blocked.
I know very well that the enemies are humans too, and not just pixels in a game. I may not agree with all of the reasons my country goes to war, but I have every bit of respect for the men and women of our armed forces who risk their lives doing what they do to protect our country and our rights. I'm proud to be able to do whatever I can to help make their jobs easier, and perhaps safer.
Instead of looking at it as building tools and weapons for the Army to allow the Warfighter to kill people, why not look at it as building tools and weapons to save the Warfighter's life and give him or her a better chance to come home to family. If a grenadier is out in the field, once he fires his first shot, he is a target. What's the first-hit success ratio for them? Give them a tool that will help them get that first shot successfully, and it will help a lot.
What about America's Army? The game has been out for a while, and has some great potential for training simulators. Integrate it into actual weapons, and it's even better :)
I think it is a great idea to have a unified UI for Linux. It can be overwhelming for a newcomer trying to transition to Linux, but knowing that there are hundreds of different distributions out there with different capabilities and sometimes different UIs. The system can be set up, and often times already is, to offer alternative UIs if the user so chooses, but keep to a standard interface by default. That way, once the user gets familiar enough with the system where he wants to explore and change settings, he can.