You know the situation better than anyone else. Are there competent people you trust to get you the information you need? If not, make system access part of the condition of accepting the position. One the nice (or painful) aspects of a job like "Enterprise Architect" is you should have the latitude to define the job to a large extent. Just remember that every hour you spend at a command prompt is time you can't spend doing the main aspects of your job. There's also the possibility of you being blamed for whatever goes wrong next, whether you were involved or not. There's an opportunity cost to system access.
How long do you expect this to last before it's needed? DVDs and USB drives are common, but I see DVDs heading out at this point. Paper has the advantage that in 40 years it'll still be readable. Of course if your passwords change you'll have to update this information anyway.
Assuming you update passwords occasionally because of a) good practice or b) some company gets hacked, I'd send it electronically and encrypted, so the person needs to actually enter a password to get to the data. Unless the recipient gets a keylogger installed, you should be safe. A text file encrypted with pgp is good for the knowledgeable recipient. For someone less savvy, I'd send them an encrypted tiddlywiki. Obviously give them the password over the phone, in person, or via snail mail.
...they treat us all like morons. Their business practices have been predatory in the past and unecessarily nasty - and that comes in a close number two reason. But I can't stand using their products because they are always "helping". And now they're gonna screw with SEARCH RESULTS? Their OS is bad...Office is worse. THIS is insulting.
The reactors did apparently shut down as they should but still needed cooling and these is where the other "links" appeared to have failed, and I stress appeared here as this will only be apparent when this whole thing is analyzed months or years from now:
It was nice of you to use your genius to save them all that time! And from thousands of miles away, too.
But, wouldn't the better method of doing things, is to have it 'play nice' right out of the box...like most email servers do? I mean, a little config is one thing, but, to have to search for obscure parameters to turn off to get it to work with most clients seems a bit poor in regards to design of a system....
The unstated assumption here is "better" means something other than "we need to lock in our customers and punish everyone else so they become our customers," which to the vendor in question is heresy.
Everytime I see this kind of comment, I get flashbacks to that cinematic masterpiece, Escape from LA. The President is literally insane, but has been voted in for life. And he's manipulated and abused Christianity to get there. Kinda like our current president.
A couple of his answers mentioned helping the developers. Now, why, when developing an end-user browser, would your focus be on developers? I do web development. The BEST thing they could have done for me is to make IE7 standards compliant. Period. Any gizmo, feature, or other perceived nicety is secondary to that.
Oh, and Browsercam? That'll help - it's a nice service, but it costs $400 per year to use it.
Uh, you essentially rent software anyway. You don't actually BUY proprietary software. You acquire a license to run it. They can take that license away at any time, usually for any reason. The software always belongs to them, though. Software as a service is just the same thing, but the license has a expiration date.
Er, Java has pointers. They are called references and you HAVE to use them every time you pass an object around - that includes any arrays, including arrays of primitives. It's just that in Java you don't have a choice on how to pass parameters to methods.
Depends on your situation. I was on a team that rewrote about 30,000 lines of code (more than a few) because the system had slowly, incrementally grown into a very brittle state and we had to add a bunch of new features. We rewrote it so we could continue to grow the system in the same incremental fashion. Was the best thing we could do - it's 4 years later and the system continues to grow in odd ways, but we never had to go back in and do more than minor fixes to that core. It worked because we knew more about how we wanted the system to work and about the problem space. It worked because we knew where all those bugs and ugly hacks and work-arounds were and we designed around them.
Granted this is not 10M lines of code or whatever Windows has, but then again we were only 3 people part time.....if the entirety of the system is too complex for any single small team to understand and re-architect, then it needs to be split up and made more modular.
You were serious? My apologies, then. It seemed like an obvious gag to me.
Investing in the SAME software on different platforms is neither inoovation nor a new way of doing business. The article said they should set up separate business units that may compete with the company's core business, because if you don't kill off your cash cow, someone else will. MS tends to "bet the farm" way too much. They sooner or later are going to lose it. Either piece by piece (like they are now) or in one big chunk.
Slashdot Mirror
The midday brown-outs during summer months here in VA contradict your conclusion.
I've done this hunt at least three times and came up short every time. Someone please find something I've missed.
You know the situation better than anyone else. Are there competent people you trust to get you the information you need? If not, make system access part of the condition of accepting the position. One the nice (or painful) aspects of a job like "Enterprise Architect" is you should have the latitude to define the job to a large extent. Just remember that every hour you spend at a command prompt is time you can't spend doing the main aspects of your job. There's also the possibility of you being blamed for whatever goes wrong next, whether you were involved or not. There's an opportunity cost to system access.
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu...
I'm going to weep when they get this power. Because it's Goldman Sachs and you know they will.
How long do you expect this to last before it's needed? DVDs and USB drives are common, but I see DVDs heading out at this point. Paper has the advantage that in 40 years it'll still be readable. Of course if your passwords change you'll have to update this information anyway. Assuming you update passwords occasionally because of a) good practice or b) some company gets hacked, I'd send it electronically and encrypted, so the person needs to actually enter a password to get to the data. Unless the recipient gets a keylogger installed, you should be safe. A text file encrypted with pgp is good for the knowledgeable recipient. For someone less savvy, I'd send them an encrypted tiddlywiki. Obviously give them the password over the phone, in person, or via snail mail.
/me points to kubuntu and xubuntu. I have a choice, even within the "*ubuntu" family. Users of Windows 8 do not.
It's actually worse. It's the same 75 lines of code over and over and over and over and over and over ....
That being said, both my kids did it :)
Alt-F2 -> konsole :D
...they treat us all like morons. Their business practices have been predatory in the past and unecessarily nasty - and that comes in a close number two reason. But I can't stand using their products because they are always "helping". And now they're gonna screw with SEARCH RESULTS? Their OS is bad...Office is worse. THIS is insulting.
http://unixwiz.net/techtips/be-consultant.html
The reactors did apparently shut down as they should but still needed cooling and these is where the other "links" appeared to have failed, and I stress appeared here as this will only be apparent when this whole thing is analyzed months or years from now:
It was nice of you to use your genius to save them all that time! And from thousands of miles away, too.
Because then the box would be so big, it wouldn't fit into your car.
... then your avatar would be the flying spaghetti monster.
The unstated assumption here is "better" means something other than "we need to lock in our customers and punish everyone else so they become our customers," which to the vendor in question is heresy.
Everytime I see this kind of comment, I get flashbacks to that cinematic masterpiece, Escape from LA. The President is literally insane, but has been voted in for life. And he's manipulated and abused Christianity to get there. Kinda like our current president.
A couple of his answers mentioned helping the developers. Now, why, when developing an end-user browser, would your focus be on developers? I do web development. The BEST thing they could have done for me is to make IE7 standards compliant. Period. Any gizmo, feature, or other perceived nicety is secondary to that.
Oh, and Browsercam? That'll help - it's a nice service, but it costs $400 per year to use it.
I think that someone is you. The microsoft.com filter was a self-effacing joke.
No, the time to dump MSFT would have been 5 years ago when it went flat
Uh, you essentially rent software anyway. You don't actually BUY proprietary software. You acquire a license to run it. They can take that license away at any time, usually for any reason. The software always belongs to them, though. Software as a service is just the same thing, but the license has a expiration date.
But you're right, it is a horrid idea.
Can you share this list? Sounds like a useful set of things to have handy.
Er, Java has pointers. They are called references and you HAVE to use them every time you pass an object around - that includes any arrays, including arrays of primitives. It's just that in Java you don't have a choice on how to pass parameters to methods.
Depends on your situation. I was on a team that rewrote about 30,000 lines of code (more than a few) because the system had slowly, incrementally grown into a very brittle state and we had to add a bunch of new features. We rewrote it so we could continue to grow the system in the same incremental fashion. Was the best thing we could do - it's 4 years later and the system continues to grow in odd ways, but we never had to go back in and do more than minor fixes to that core. It worked because we knew more about how we wanted the system to work and about the problem space. It worked because we knew where all those bugs and ugly hacks and work-arounds were and we designed around them. Granted this is not 10M lines of code or whatever Windows has, but then again we were only 3 people part time.....if the entirety of the system is too complex for any single small team to understand and re-architect, then it needs to be split up and made more modular.
. . . use crap software
You were serious? My apologies, then. It seemed like an obvious gag to me.
Investing in the SAME software on different platforms is neither inoovation nor a new way of doing business. The article said they should set up separate business units that may compete with the company's core business, because if you don't kill off your cash cow, someone else will. MS tends to "bet the farm" way too much. They sooner or later are going to lose it. Either piece by piece (like they are now) or in one big chunk.