1) Is it just me, or does the sum of $100million over 5 years say one of two things; that the IT spending at Bank of America is hugely inefficient, or they're being ovely optimistic about how much money they could possibly save through the outsourcing. I'm not questioning the need to 'cut off the fat' but at the same time, there needs to be some accountability when the results don't pan out to the promises preached by the powers that be.
2) What is the average pay of the IT worker there? have the been offered the possibility of a pay cut, or some other form of restructuring to allow even a modest amount to remain employed? like I said, all very nice 'cutting the fat' but there is more than one way to 'cut the fat' in an organisation; having seem the wastage before, cutting a few technies is chicken shit compared to the monumental cockups that get done when upper management get their noses into decisions which they're not qualified to make - prime example of these cock ups was in Australia, with National Australia Bank, and $300million lost due to currency trading cockups - who bore the brunt of this financial cock up? the employee's, the lowly grunter in the trenches.
This isn't the first time they cocked up an VLIW design, and they're not the only company who has designed one; take a look at the Majc chip from Sun, which is a VLIW designed as an embedded processor for Java based applications - http://arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/majc/majc-1.html
You could say that EPIC/VLIW reads a bit like RISC (which is basically what EPIC is, RISC taken to the absolute extreme; through out all the OOE and so forth, push up the clock speed to handle any branch mispredictions etc. ); the slow realisation that academic 'theories' never translate into real world work loads.
That is assuming whether Lenovo is unwise enough to enter into a perpetual exclusive contract with them.
Worse comes to worse, Lenovo could always setup a subsidary dedicated to Linux computers, under a different name, if they needed to get out of a sticky situation with Microsoft.
I think that the feature issue will be a tipping point for Free Software in general, not just Linux/Linux distros. MS adds more crap to their software that nobody wants, yet people keep paying for it because they know there's a certain level of support that's going to be there no matter what.
Most definately; some say, "oh, well, thats what customers demand", but I've yet to find someone who has asked for sharepoint, for example - what is the purpose of that? it seems to be nothing more than a glorified php + DB back end + phorum running on top, which, quite frankly, doesn't yield a single improvement in productivity as to justify the costs of upgrading and retraining.
Another good example is Photoshop - how many have moved beyond version 9? I mean, apart from the Mac user who upgraded from classic to the carbon version, then eventually to the universal binary, look at the number who are happily running their 4-5 year old copy of Photoshop, doing the same sorts of things without any problems. The only people I see upgrading, are those who have this fetish that software wears out, and needs upgrading regularly.
Chief example would be Windows Vista; having a look at it, compared it to Windows XP and alternative operating systems, one has to ask, "where is the beef"? where is the customer pulling, earth shattering, clean slate, 'lets get things right the first time' factors which will make Vista an improvement over XP? already the new 'Limited User Account" (or what ever it is named) has been a flop; Winfs has been purged already for 'shipment at a later date' and the remaining components left are of no benefit to the end user given that they can either be achieved via installing third party tools ontop of Windows XP, already available on MacOS X or if they're inclined, they could upgrade to one of the many quality opensource operating systems out there; in my case, I run FreeBSD + Xorg + KDE + Koffice; far superior to Microsoft or any commercial entity has to offer.
As for Microsoft, they won't 'weaken' but they'll become less and less relevant in the IT industry, but like a spoilt bratt, they'll jump up and down, they'll try to make some noise, like they're doing with Windows Vista; but most people have gone past Microsoft, no ones interested in their products anymore, the hype, the momentum is gone; customers are looking elsewhere, they want a different way, a different approach to how customers are serviced in the software industry.
Sun is making moves; PC-BSD is making head roads as users are looking at an easy to use *BSD for their desktops, Red Hat are concerntrating on the servers are the moment, and Novell are focusing on getting their corporate offerings being based around mono. Microsoft know what the future will entail, and they're scared; no more multimillion dollar dinner parties and trips with customers, no more excessive number of staff employed and being funded off the back of monopolistic practices; the 'reform' will be tough, but it will happen in the end.
Linux like UNIX's in general (including *BSD) aren't, sad to say, in great demand by typical end users; if it isn't the hardware support issue, it'll be an issue of ISV's that provide their software on Linux.
Some see this as "Microsoft strong arming", but Lenovo is simply asking, "where is the biggest market", and the biggest market is for machines loaded with Windows, and laden with software ontop.
Is this a set back for Linux on the desktop (on any other UNIX), not really; given that the largest is Dell - who quite frankly, couldn't care less what is loaded onto their machines; start to worry when Dell snubs other operating systems.
Also, lets remember that 40% of the computers shipped today are from small 'white box', local computer stores not the large mega corporations.
Ultimately, however, the ball is in Linux's court; opensource is getting there; it just depends on how patient people are; if they're willing to wait (like me), in a few years time, you'll start to see commercial feature rich software opensource software with in the next couple of years - lets remember, the rate at which features are being added to commercial software is decreasing, companies ( Microsoft namely) have reached a point of diminishing returns - every new feature they're adding, is yielding less and less enthusiasm from the 'geek crowd' and their main customer base.
Its just a matter of time; personally, its going to be the commercial companies who will suffer, they either make the port of their software to alternative operating systems, and gain customer loyalty, or shun these platforms, resulting in opensource software becoming the equal and defacto standard on said platforms.
Yes, although this is slightly off topic, in the end it all ties back to *NIX/*BSD on the desktop, customer demand, and how that customer demand is derived from whether the operating system can provide the same level of software which they need at home, at the office or on the road.
The fact that India subsidises Gas, Petrol and Kerosine; so you may get $800 per month, but a good portion of your cost of living is being subsidised.
As for the amount, one has to look at the cost of living, and the likes; in New Zealand, the minimum wage is NZ$9.50 per hour; I'm on $11.20 per hour, in the average week, I'm paid around NZ$320-370 (with tax taken off); if one converted NZ dollars to US, I would be considered 'poor' but given the low cost in living in NZ; rent being $100 per week, power, $20 per week etc. one can easily have $120-150 left at the end of each week.
Visual basic allows *very* ugly code to run; the problem with VB isn't necessarily the language or the API; but the fact that it allows *TOO MUCH* freedom, resulting in ugly code, ugly hacks being used; hence my amazement that VisualBasic is actually used as a language to teach other languages (this was back in 2000 btw), before visual basic was introduced, Pascal was the learning tool of choice.
Now, it sounded all very nice, but the reality hit when C++ is taught, basically you have to dump everything you ever learned about Visual Basic, and learn the correct way.
I think in the end, what makes a bad VB programme and source code, isn't necessarily the language itself, but the programmer who fails to discipline him or herself to sticking to the basic programming principles; now sure, Microsoft could go in there, have *very* strict rules for how code should be laid out, resulting in the most crapiest of programmes to be rejected, and thus require reviewing, but at the same time, this is also Visual Basic's strengths, the ability to write very dirty and very quick code, and push it out to the users with in a space of a few hours - then sort the niceities of the software out later on.
True, its a lost sale, but here is another thing as well.
Almost *EVERY* piece of software is developed in the US - Microsoft has NO development jobs in New Zealand; therefore, apart from some sales people, and paper shufflers in New Zealand, is there actually any loss to the New Zealand economy if even 80% of software is pirated.
Most of the software developed in NZ is custom written stuff for government departments and large organisations, thus, piracy is a non-issue for them; so apart from that, the only people who are complaining at the Microsofts, SUN's, Lotus's and Oracles of the world, who are pissed that they're not leaching money off their overseas companies.
Maybe if they actually INVESTED some money into their overseas subsidaries, then you might actually see the general public might give a toss.
Oh, and I think the CEO of Oracle put it best, 'people who wish to use our software and need the support, will buy a legitimate copy' - well said, if Microsoft actually had a compelling argument to justify why Joe Blogs who earns $22,000 per year, as to why he should part with $699 for a copy of Microsoft Office or $499 for a copy of Windows XP Professional (retail prices), then maybe the level of piracy would drop to nothing.
If companies wish for their software to be bought rather than pirated, how about making the barrier to purchasing, alot lower; is Microsoft Office *really* worth $699? of course it, its a bloody rip off; same goes for Photoshop, is it *really* worth the thousand or so dollars which people get price gouged? of course not.
Alot software is overpriced and of poor quality because many of these companies hide behind the whole programming mystic, as if there was something special or mystical about programming, and that since programming is *so* special, you'll have to pay a high price for the product - when in reality, its no more complex or complicated than any other consumer device out there.
True to an extent, but it has to do more with societies values and than whether who gets more money - because ultimately who gets the money is a represents societies priorities.
If you're academic, it seems that in society, both in the US and in most western countries; you're chatised and become an outcase of society, as if academic achievement doesn't hold a candle to a game involving 15 people on both sides, beating the crap out of each other to get an oval ball from one end of the field to another (aka Rugby).
There needs to also be a balance as well - 50 years ago; one could be smart AND be successful at sports, one could also be smart and get praise from society, today, however, if it isn't 'sexy, hip or cool', it gets derided by the anti-intellectualism that seems to be permiating accross western society - that being dumb is cool.
I don't quite agree with that; the biggest problem is the initial cost of the thin clients vs buying a full out PC, loading it with Windows, and dumping on the SUN Ray client application.
If SUN really wish for people to adopt the SUN Ray in droves, they would have to drop it to *atleast* $100-$150 (the screen AIO models), and drop even further to encourage large enterprise customers to adopt it.
Either that or with the $100 per employee per year packages, they give a free SUN Ray appliance for each employee (and possibly one for the home so that the end user, via broadband, can work from home, as SUN has tested with their employees) - again, that will definately make people move; the question is, are SUN willing to make that massive hit in terms of loss to grow the popularit of the SUN Ray beyond the call centre environment.
While the constant MS bashing was interesting, I think it worked against Sun, and not for it. It sent the message "Buy Sun if you hate Microsoft." Like it or not, hating MSFT isn't a great way to run a billion dollar business.
I agree with what you're saying; whilst he was ranting about Microsoft, and making smart ass comments, customers were going, "oh, thats nice, Microsoft isn't your best friend - so where is the beef"?
Before the nose dive in pofitability and revenue, an analyst came out and warned that SUN needed to win more customers rather than simply relying on the same crop of customers to buy over and over again - Scott and his company didn't heed this warning; the bottom fell out of the dot-com hype (it always was going to occur, it was unsustainable hype, and VC's wanted this annoying little thing - PROFIT!), everything hit the fan.
The problem with SUN is simple, they need to boost workstation sales (that will increase volume, thus able to lower their server prices and/or maintain existing prices and increase margins) by paying companies to port their applications from Windows/Solaris SPARC to Solaris x86, they need to get in bed with hardware companies to encourage development of Solaris x86 drivers, and most of all, they need to improve their sales model - they need to adopt a direct to customer model which Dell uses, and in turn, makes them very successful; why should I weave and wonder through third parties when all I should need to do, anywhere in the world (in my case, New Zealand), jump onto www.sun.com and simply buy directly off them, and allow them to sort the issues of transportation etc.
Having sales people is nice, for those who need to be hand held through the purchasing process, but in large organisation such as a government department, they don't need hand holding, they've already done the research, so get out of the customers way, and allow them to make the purchase - now unless you can offer them a discount of 20% or wish to provide a free lap dance, pizza and beer to all the staff at the organisation, quite frankly, the customer doesn't want to hear from you.
I don't understand why Microsoft doesn't just rewrite Internet Explorer in.NET. They can leave the existing rendering engine behind as a legacy component and work on a new IE that can take advantage of.NET's security mechanisms. Not only would it be a good excuse for a clean break, but it would also give them a chance to show off what.NET can do for desktop apps.
That sounds like a fine idea on paper, but the reality is; if they went out, did a complete clean implementation of an HTML and other related techologies in the form of 'frameworks', the balanced a interface coupling all those frameworks together, would it actually yield security benefits?
There is alot of myths out there, that some how, through some voodoo magic, the solution to all of programmings problems is to simply throw it in a virtual machine/managed code, and voila, all problems are resolved. It isn't, it fixes old problems and creates new ones.
I think the most blaringly obvious thing was stated by the IE guru at Microsoft who pointed out where the IE security holes are - as the gentleman said; well over half the problems are things not properly locked down, ActiveX features being enabled that shouldn't be.
With that being said, however, the issue isn't so much necessarily the bugs found in IE, but the speed in which they're found, corrected, and patches are deployed (that actually work without fudging the system) - that is the true measurement of success or failure in the IT world; if Microsoft can accomplish turn arounds of 72 hours, in regards to bug finds, security fix, and deployment, then they'll be getting ontop of things.
I think the other obvious thing that Dvorak forgets is this; Internet Explorer (IE) is used as a gateway to Microsofts future online applications; right now they maybe praising the idea of a browser plugin in the form of WPF/PE to allow 'access' (demostrated recently with a plugin using Firefox on a Macintosh), but mark my words, it'll be the same old, "well, if you really want the full eXPerience, you'll need to be running Windows Vista with Internet Explorer 7'.
To make matters worse, you'll log in, and find in the menus, 'only available for users of Internet Explorer 7' just to rub it in a little more.
Anyone surprised, of course not; they'll embrace AJAX alright, then extend it in a way which will only be compatible with Windows; we'll have programmers coo over it like its manna from the heavens when in reality, its more like crack from the local dealer - 'the first hit is free!'.
These same programmers concrigate places like this, bad mouthing Microsoft, blaming them for everything from global warming, to famines to the lack of third world debt relief; and yet, these very same programmers CHOOSE to prop up the Microsoft monopoly; if it weren't for these people 'volunteerily' propping up Microsoft in way of programmes, and other crap, Windows would fall over, and any reason for continuing to use Windows, running ones favourite application because its only available for Windows, would be gone.
Yes, its a little off-topic towards the end, but I think people need to realise that Internet Explorer IS the thin end of the wedge; you can either bend over for uncle bill and claim that the 'extra features' are worth the future restrictions on choice, or you can say, 'no, I am not going to sacrifice future choice, for the convenience of today'.
When I was living in Canberra, Australia; I was looking for a fulltime job, and was quite happy with the idea of working for a retail technology chain like Dick Smiths, Harvey Norman or some other outfit.
In October/November, around 2 months before I left Australia, I decided I would like to stay in Australia, and hopefully further my career (maybe enter the Australian public service once I got my Australian citizenship which was only a matter of a few months away).
I was interviewed for a job with Dick Smiths 'Power House'; my resume ranges from running my own computer business, to working in retail in terms of face to face transactions, and providing sales and technical support over the phone - so you could say that I did have a reasonable level of experience, and if chosen, I could hit the ground running rather than having to be trained up.
Did I get the job? nope. According to my sources there, they chose a youngster who didn't know the difference between a DVD and a CD; they chose the kid because of his 'limited horizons'; the problem with me? I was over qualified, I might possibly work further up the 'food chain' in terms of management, and I posed a direct threat to their jobs; so of course, they hire someone who is mediocre so that they can maintain their current jobs.
The problem is, there are people out there, like me, who could do the job, and do have the experience to sell things, but instead, they choose the cheaper option, the option of the pimply faced teenager with limited vision and scope as to where they want to go in the future.
Its funny though, every place I've worked at so far, management look at my resume and instantly ask, "why don't you enter IT? you seem well qualified for that area!" to which I explain the situation - Sorry, there are many others out there like me who are qualified in IT, can do the job, but choose not to enter the industry because the industry is full of wankers and tossers; right now, I'm quite happy with where I am, its not IT related, its in retail, I have a dozen people working under me, I set my own hours, I earn more than what I could have in the IT world, and when I perform, I get rewarded by management rather than chatised as with the case of the IT world.
In New Zealand we have EFTPOS; a large network created back in the 1970s by the government owned Databank, which forced all banks to network their systems together via the Reserve Bank to provide speedy transfers of money between customers, banks and the likes.
Today, we have EFTPOS, I can go anywhere in New Zealand with my EFTPOS card and I can access my money either via an EFTPOS machine at either the local service station, pizza chain, and heck, even the pie cart out the front of Wellington station has an EFTPOS machine hooked up to a mobile phone - thus, able to conduct transactions even where there are no telephone lines! I can go online, pay all my bills via the online system, transfer cash between accounts and send money to people.
So this whole 'cashless society' maybe new to Europeans and Americans, but I can assure, in New Zealand, the two largest forms of payment are EFTPOS, followed by Credit Card, then cash, and right behind, and slowly dying, are cheques. When people say 'I'm paying by cheque' the automatic assumption by those at the till is, 'this person doesn't have the money, and is riding on the hope that they'll get cash in the next 5 days' and tend to be wary of accepting it.
I think the biggest dishonesty that the environmental movement have pushed is this idea that we can maintain the same standard of living if we some how pushed all the power plants into the ocean and started using biomass, geothermal (hotrock using water pumped down, and using the steam; as well as naturally occuring steam process), wind, solar and the likes.
I'm sorry, but to cut down on output of CO2s, we first have to hault the growth in energy demand - some how come up with more efficient means of product THEN we must go in the reverse in respects to our energy usage. Now sure, we can go around, turn off lights, keep the temperate level rather than what I see in the US - the house so warm that people are walking around in singlets on.
But with all that 'noble' energy savings, all this will come at a cost to our standard of living; now, I'm quite happy to ride my bike to work, use public transport, use less electricity, but at the same time, are the 6.9billion other inhabitants willing to do that? thats the thing they never answer.
They never answer the amount of CO2 put out during the production of these 'renewable facilities' - as a UK environmentalist said, more pollution is put out during the production of these damn wind farms than the amount of CO2 they would have saved - it seems that these things, and sponsored by government, are nothing more than big bits of propaganda to hide the real problems which we face.
Whilst all this is occuring we have GWB running off to Iraq, spending $500billion of US funds for a war that needn't be fought - imagine if that $500billion was all redirected into R&D for Fusion power - imagine where we would be NOW if that occured; we would already be seeing them designed for coming online in 10 years, hydrogen powered car prototypes would be getting tested, and we would be on the road to sustainable power.
The EU, rather than spending billions upon billions supporting inefficient farmers, they redirected it towards Fusion power, same situation; it seems that government are all very willing to spend money on vote winners like corporate or agricultural welfare, but when it comes to long term funding to address long term, unsexy issues, they seem to go AWOL.
MySQL is a company, they can either go out, do a SUN Microsystems and re-invent the wheel (as the case of their continuously promised, improved sound API that hasn't seen the light of day) and find themselves further behind the eighth ball OR they can go out, find something that is around 70-80% of what they need, and spend a few months writing up the last 20% which the software doesn't address.
Its all about product turn arounds, getting to market, and ensuring that YOU and YOUR company have the best end to end solution money can buy - so compelling that the customer jumps face first into the contract and wants to sign up instantly.
I'm really sick of people attacking IE. Sure, IE has always introduced alot of proprietary features, but the black fact is when IE6 came out back in 2001 it was the most powerful browser in existance on the Windows platform. If not for Firefox extensions or Opera's recent offerings it would, IMHO, still be so...sorry tabbed interfaces just don't cut it from a technical standpoint for me.
True, but I think people need to also remember these things; in terms of the 'embrace and extend' of the web; the first move was made by Netscape, no one picked up on those 'Netscape only features' because they yieled no benefit to the web developer, the extensions Microsoft introduced is a different story altogether; every man and his dog embrace them - whilst the badmouthing of Microsoft was occuring, why was there more effort put into slamming Microsoft than implementing these extensions?
As for the standards, I thin what alot of people here fail to realise is this; W3C is a committee, and we all know what committee's are like when designing something; just look how long OpenGL 2.0 took to ratify - hardly something I'd put up as an example of how 'working together' is superior than 'going it alone.
As for Microsoft; if they wish to earn some good will; properly document those extensions, explain their reasons for them, and encourage third party developers to make them part of their product and support them.
Microsoft is a very large company in reference to their position in the IT industry, they can either use this position for good, to push development forward, or for evil, to maintain and extend their monopoly.
Babe, do what I do, choose not to watch it; thats what an adult would do; you have the power right there in your hands.
Yes, you made that choice to drop television, BUT at the same time, what gives you the right to some how unilaterally start imposing your values on those who may not share them.
As a software developer I can tell you that customers are a pain in the arse. I don't know if you know that yet, but most of them expect software to be written within 5 minutes of their first phone call that something is not like they want it. And I Microsoft releases patches, it's just not as easy as you say to simply demand a patch from the developers. I mean, come on, do you think that, especially for large scale enterprise applications, when a patch rolls in, they can deploy everything in one day, fix, test, release? It's a long process!
Excuse me, but Windows XP Service Pack 2 features had been known for almost over a year before it was release; OVER A YEAR! so you're telling me, as a programmer, than a year to check your code, is impossible? How about Windows NT in a multi-user environment? why don't you test it in a restrictive environment?
These are issues that need to be addressed NOW and yet application vendors wait till the very last minute before making sure their software works with Windows; and Windows Vista will be another disaster with software companies waiting till RTM is made available rather than progressively test their products with Windows Vista as it is developed, making the necessary changes, and possibly back port some of those changes back to their existing products.
That is the problem; and you know what will happen, a few more software vendors will get whiped out as customers get pissed off waiting, and simply adopt a Microsoft solution; Wordperfect/Lotus/Wordstar/Harvard Graphics learned that the hard way by declaring that Microsoft Office was no threat, and Windows 3.1 was just a passing fad - look where we are today; those companies are dead, dying or at laughing status.
Want to be the next victim of the Microsoft jugganaut, then go ahead, treat your customers like crap, fail to update your software, fail to test, and fail to embrace new features Microsoft makes available in their products; you'll find your market share go from dominant, to majority, to minority, then to 'out of business' status.
Note that I don't necessarily agree with the OP (A GLBT guild is clearly based on sexual preference, but I'm not convinced a GLBT guild is based on sexual activity).
Well, I wouldn't call it 'preference' but 'orientation', preference would assume there was a conscience decision, as well as assuming that it is about sex, when homosexuality is the attraction - physically and emotionally, to each other.
Anyway, the equivilant of a GLBT guild would be one a African American Guild, or a anything really that brings together of a single common interest; which can be anything from sexual orientation to what they enjoy doing on the week end.
And I wouldn't care if everyone in your guild WAS GLBT. You could advertise yourself outside of WoW as the GLBT guild, but don't drag that kind of stuff into the game. p>While I understand how the person felt with all the "this is gay" (I got sick of it real fast and I'm straight, so I can see how they felt), there is no need to draw that into the game and start a GLBT guild. Just ignore those people, or report it to Blizzard and see if they'll give the person a warning.
Even for me, as a gay fella, I don't understand what this whole mountain was created out of a molehill; a game is a game, and if people wish to 'advertise their guild', wouldn't the appropriate website be more appropriate than interupting a players game with spam about a particular guild starting?
I've got no worries with a gay guild; its a place where gay players can hang out, chat about 'gay issues' (aka, boyfriend problems) in a general discussion area - some treat online gaming as also a way to develop some online buddies, so for me, I don't have an issue with a GLBT guild per-say.
Your not queer, just confused. There is no gay gene. Your different, get on with your life. Your parents (and their parents) spawned you. Nature/Darwin conflicts with your beliefs. Your weak and insecure. Get a women, boink her and have a beer. Hell, get several ladies if you can.
Hey, I'm not the one who uses 'anonymous coward' because of fear of karma going through the floor
So whilst you're living in your mum and dads basement, twiddling with your doodle whilst playing Quake or some other damn game, I'm out getting laid, having a life, and enjoying myself.
I'd disagree, partially, with this. Yes, it isn't Microsoft's responsibility to provide backwards compatibility to people who have used undocumented behaviour - but where they have changed the API so that it no longer operates as documented, then it is their responsibility.
But that isn't the issue; the issue is, they FIX an API so that it works the way its documented, but people expect that they provide compatibility for those who relied on the API when it was broken.
If something is broken, it needs to be fixed; if there is a security hole, the first priority should be to fix the hole, notify ISV's via way of a operating system eratta, and the respective ISV's should then scramble their programmers to test, and provide, if necessary, and update to ensure that customers can continue on like normal.
The problem is, software companies aren't living up to their end of the bargin; the documentation is there, when there are changes, they're listed to; its up to ISV's to stay ontop of the game, and ensure that if and when their software needs to be updated to maintain compatibility, they do so in a timely manner.
Slashdot Mirror
1) Is it just me, or does the sum of $100million over 5 years say one of two things; that the IT spending at Bank of America is hugely inefficient, or they're being ovely optimistic about how much money they could possibly save through the outsourcing. I'm not questioning the need to 'cut off the fat' but at the same time, there needs to be some accountability when the results don't pan out to the promises preached by the powers that be.
2) What is the average pay of the IT worker there? have the been offered the possibility of a pay cut, or some other form of restructuring to allow even a modest amount to remain employed? like I said, all very nice 'cutting the fat' but there is more than one way to 'cut the fat' in an organisation; having seem the wastage before, cutting a few technies is chicken shit compared to the monumental cockups that get done when upper management get their noses into decisions which they're not qualified to make - prime example of these cock ups was in Australia, with National Australia Bank, and $300million lost due to currency trading cockups - who bore the brunt of this financial cock up? the employee's, the lowly grunter in the trenches.
This isn't the first time they cocked up an VLIW design, and they're not the only company who has designed one; take a look at the Majc chip from Sun, which is a VLIW designed as an embedded processor for Java based applications - http://arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/majc/majc-1.html
You could say that EPIC/VLIW reads a bit like RISC (which is basically what EPIC is, RISC taken to the absolute extreme; through out all the OOE and so forth, push up the clock speed to handle any branch mispredictions etc. ); the slow realisation that academic 'theories' never translate into real world work loads.
That is assuming whether Lenovo is unwise enough to enter into a perpetual exclusive contract with them.
Worse comes to worse, Lenovo could always setup a subsidary dedicated to Linux computers, under a different name, if they needed to get out of a sticky situation with Microsoft.
Most definately; some say, "oh, well, thats what customers demand", but I've yet to find someone who has asked for sharepoint, for example - what is the purpose of that? it seems to be nothing more than a glorified php + DB back end + phorum running on top, which, quite frankly, doesn't yield a single improvement in productivity as to justify the costs of upgrading and retraining.
Another good example is Photoshop - how many have moved beyond version 9? I mean, apart from the Mac user who upgraded from classic to the carbon version, then eventually to the universal binary, look at the number who are happily running their 4-5 year old copy of Photoshop, doing the same sorts of things without any problems. The only people I see upgrading, are those who have this fetish that software wears out, and needs upgrading regularly.
Chief example would be Windows Vista; having a look at it, compared it to Windows XP and alternative operating systems, one has to ask, "where is the beef"? where is the customer pulling, earth shattering, clean slate, 'lets get things right the first time' factors which will make Vista an improvement over XP? already the new 'Limited User Account" (or what ever it is named) has been a flop; Winfs has been purged already for 'shipment at a later date' and the remaining components left are of no benefit to the end user given that they can either be achieved via installing third party tools ontop of Windows XP, already available on MacOS X or if they're inclined, they could upgrade to one of the many quality opensource operating systems out there; in my case, I run FreeBSD + Xorg + KDE + Koffice; far superior to Microsoft or any commercial entity has to offer.
As for Microsoft, they won't 'weaken' but they'll become less and less relevant in the IT industry, but like a spoilt bratt, they'll jump up and down, they'll try to make some noise, like they're doing with Windows Vista; but most people have gone past Microsoft, no ones interested in their products anymore, the hype, the momentum is gone; customers are looking elsewhere, they want a different way, a different approach to how customers are serviced in the software industry.
Sun is making moves; PC-BSD is making head roads as users are looking at an easy to use *BSD for their desktops, Red Hat are concerntrating on the servers are the moment, and Novell are focusing on getting their corporate offerings being based around mono. Microsoft know what the future will entail, and they're scared; no more multimillion dollar dinner parties and trips with customers, no more excessive number of staff employed and being funded off the back of monopolistic practices; the 'reform' will be tough, but it will happen in the end.
Linux like UNIX's in general (including *BSD) aren't, sad to say, in great demand by typical end users; if it isn't the hardware support issue, it'll be an issue of ISV's that provide their software on Linux.
Some see this as "Microsoft strong arming", but Lenovo is simply asking, "where is the biggest market", and the biggest market is for machines loaded with Windows, and laden with software ontop.
Is this a set back for Linux on the desktop (on any other UNIX), not really; given that the largest is Dell - who quite frankly, couldn't care less what is loaded onto their machines; start to worry when Dell snubs other operating systems.
Also, lets remember that 40% of the computers shipped today are from small 'white box', local computer stores not the large mega corporations.
Ultimately, however, the ball is in Linux's court; opensource is getting there; it just depends on how patient people are; if they're willing to wait (like me), in a few years time, you'll start to see commercial feature rich software opensource software with in the next couple of years - lets remember, the rate at which features are being added to commercial software is decreasing, companies ( Microsoft namely) have reached a point of diminishing returns - every new feature they're adding, is yielding less and less enthusiasm from the 'geek crowd' and their main customer base.
Its just a matter of time; personally, its going to be the commercial companies who will suffer, they either make the port of their software to alternative operating systems, and gain customer loyalty, or shun these platforms, resulting in opensource software becoming the equal and defacto standard on said platforms.
Yes, although this is slightly off topic, in the end it all ties back to *NIX/*BSD on the desktop, customer demand, and how that customer demand is derived from whether the operating system can provide the same level of software which they need at home, at the office or on the road.
The fact that India subsidises Gas, Petrol and Kerosine; so you may get $800 per month, but a good portion of your cost of living is being subsidised.
As for the amount, one has to look at the cost of living, and the likes; in New Zealand, the minimum wage is NZ$9.50 per hour; I'm on $11.20 per hour, in the average week, I'm paid around NZ$320-370 (with tax taken off); if one converted NZ dollars to US, I would be considered 'poor' but given the low cost in living in NZ; rent being $100 per week, power, $20 per week etc. one can easily have $120-150 left at the end of each week.
Too bad they didn't purge the marketing department, because lord knows it needs a swift kick up the behind.
Visual basic allows *very* ugly code to run; the problem with VB isn't necessarily the language or the API; but the fact that it allows *TOO MUCH* freedom, resulting in ugly code, ugly hacks being used; hence my amazement that VisualBasic is actually used as a language to teach other languages (this was back in 2000 btw), before visual basic was introduced, Pascal was the learning tool of choice.
Now, it sounded all very nice, but the reality hit when C++ is taught, basically you have to dump everything you ever learned about Visual Basic, and learn the correct way.
I think in the end, what makes a bad VB programme and source code, isn't necessarily the language itself, but the programmer who fails to discipline him or herself to sticking to the basic programming principles; now sure, Microsoft could go in there, have *very* strict rules for how code should be laid out, resulting in the most crapiest of programmes to be rejected, and thus require reviewing, but at the same time, this is also Visual Basic's strengths, the ability to write very dirty and very quick code, and push it out to the users with in a space of a few hours - then sort the niceities of the software out later on.
True, its a lost sale, but here is another thing as well.
Almost *EVERY* piece of software is developed in the US - Microsoft has NO development jobs in New Zealand; therefore, apart from some sales people, and paper shufflers in New Zealand, is there actually any loss to the New Zealand economy if even 80% of software is pirated.
Most of the software developed in NZ is custom written stuff for government departments and large organisations, thus, piracy is a non-issue for them; so apart from that, the only people who are complaining at the Microsofts, SUN's, Lotus's and Oracles of the world, who are pissed that they're not leaching money off their overseas companies.
Maybe if they actually INVESTED some money into their overseas subsidaries, then you might actually see the general public might give a toss.
Oh, and I think the CEO of Oracle put it best, 'people who wish to use our software and need the support, will buy a legitimate copy' - well said, if Microsoft actually had a compelling argument to justify why Joe Blogs who earns $22,000 per year, as to why he should part with $699 for a copy of Microsoft Office or $499 for a copy of Windows XP Professional (retail prices), then maybe the level of piracy would drop to nothing.
If companies wish for their software to be bought rather than pirated, how about making the barrier to purchasing, alot lower; is Microsoft Office *really* worth $699? of course it, its a bloody rip off; same goes for Photoshop, is it *really* worth the thousand or so dollars which people get price gouged? of course not.
Alot software is overpriced and of poor quality because many of these companies hide behind the whole programming mystic, as if there was something special or mystical about programming, and that since programming is *so* special, you'll have to pay a high price for the product - when in reality, its no more complex or complicated than any other consumer device out there.
True to an extent, but it has to do more with societies values and than whether who gets more money - because ultimately who gets the money is a represents societies priorities.
If you're academic, it seems that in society, both in the US and in most western countries; you're chatised and become an outcase of society, as if academic achievement doesn't hold a candle to a game involving 15 people on both sides, beating the crap out of each other to get an oval ball from one end of the field to another (aka Rugby).
There needs to also be a balance as well - 50 years ago; one could be smart AND be successful at sports, one could also be smart and get praise from society, today, however, if it isn't 'sexy, hip or cool', it gets derided by the anti-intellectualism that seems to be permiating accross western society - that being dumb is cool.
I don't quite agree with that; the biggest problem is the initial cost of the thin clients vs buying a full out PC, loading it with Windows, and dumping on the SUN Ray client application.
If SUN really wish for people to adopt the SUN Ray in droves, they would have to drop it to *atleast* $100-$150 (the screen AIO models), and drop even further to encourage large enterprise customers to adopt it.
Either that or with the $100 per employee per year packages, they give a free SUN Ray appliance for each employee (and possibly one for the home so that the end user, via broadband, can work from home, as SUN has tested with their employees) - again, that will definately make people move; the question is, are SUN willing to make that massive hit in terms of loss to grow the popularit of the SUN Ray beyond the call centre environment.
I agree with what you're saying; whilst he was ranting about Microsoft, and making smart ass comments, customers were going, "oh, thats nice, Microsoft isn't your best friend - so where is the beef"?
Before the nose dive in pofitability and revenue, an analyst came out and warned that SUN needed to win more customers rather than simply relying on the same crop of customers to buy over and over again - Scott and his company didn't heed this warning; the bottom fell out of the dot-com hype (it always was going to occur, it was unsustainable hype, and VC's wanted this annoying little thing - PROFIT!), everything hit the fan.
The problem with SUN is simple, they need to boost workstation sales (that will increase volume, thus able to lower their server prices and/or maintain existing prices and increase margins) by paying companies to port their applications from Windows/Solaris SPARC to Solaris x86, they need to get in bed with hardware companies to encourage development of Solaris x86 drivers, and most of all, they need to improve their sales model - they need to adopt a direct to customer model which Dell uses, and in turn, makes them very successful; why should I weave and wonder through third parties when all I should need to do, anywhere in the world (in my case, New Zealand), jump onto www.sun.com and simply buy directly off them, and allow them to sort the issues of transportation etc.
Having sales people is nice, for those who need to be hand held through the purchasing process, but in large organisation such as a government department, they don't need hand holding, they've already done the research, so get out of the customers way, and allow them to make the purchase - now unless you can offer them a discount of 20% or wish to provide a free lap dance, pizza and beer to all the staff at the organisation, quite frankly, the customer doesn't want to hear from you.
That sounds like a fine idea on paper, but the reality is; if they went out, did a complete clean implementation of an HTML and other related techologies in the form of 'frameworks', the balanced a interface coupling all those frameworks together, would it actually yield security benefits?
There is alot of myths out there, that some how, through some voodoo magic, the solution to all of programmings problems is to simply throw it in a virtual machine/managed code, and voila, all problems are resolved. It isn't, it fixes old problems and creates new ones.
I think the most blaringly obvious thing was stated by the IE guru at Microsoft who pointed out where the IE security holes are - as the gentleman said; well over half the problems are things not properly locked down, ActiveX features being enabled that shouldn't be.
With that being said, however, the issue isn't so much necessarily the bugs found in IE, but the speed in which they're found, corrected, and patches are deployed (that actually work without fudging the system) - that is the true measurement of success or failure in the IT world; if Microsoft can accomplish turn arounds of 72 hours, in regards to bug finds, security fix, and deployment, then they'll be getting ontop of things.
I think the other obvious thing that Dvorak forgets is this; Internet Explorer (IE) is used as a gateway to Microsofts future online applications; right now they maybe praising the idea of a browser plugin in the form of WPF/PE to allow 'access' (demostrated recently with a plugin using Firefox on a Macintosh), but mark my words, it'll be the same old, "well, if you really want the full eXPerience, you'll need to be running Windows Vista with Internet Explorer 7'.
To make matters worse, you'll log in, and find in the menus, 'only available for users of Internet Explorer 7' just to rub it in a little more.
Anyone surprised, of course not; they'll embrace AJAX alright, then extend it in a way which will only be compatible with Windows; we'll have programmers coo over it like its manna from the heavens when in reality, its more like crack from the local dealer - 'the first hit is free!'.
These same programmers concrigate places like this, bad mouthing Microsoft, blaming them for everything from global warming, to famines to the lack of third world debt relief; and yet, these very same programmers CHOOSE to prop up the Microsoft monopoly; if it weren't for these people 'volunteerily' propping up Microsoft in way of programmes, and other crap, Windows would fall over, and any reason for continuing to use Windows, running ones favourite application because its only available for Windows, would be gone.
Yes, its a little off-topic towards the end, but I think people need to realise that Internet Explorer IS the thin end of the wedge; you can either bend over for uncle bill and claim that the 'extra features' are worth the future restrictions on choice, or you can say, 'no, I am not going to sacrifice future choice, for the convenience of today'.
When I was living in Canberra, Australia; I was looking for a fulltime job, and was quite happy with the idea of working for a retail technology chain like Dick Smiths, Harvey Norman or some other outfit.
In October/November, around 2 months before I left Australia, I decided I would like to stay in Australia, and hopefully further my career (maybe enter the Australian public service once I got my Australian citizenship which was only a matter of a few months away).
I was interviewed for a job with Dick Smiths 'Power House'; my resume ranges from running my own computer business, to working in retail in terms of face to face transactions, and providing sales and technical support over the phone - so you could say that I did have a reasonable level of experience, and if chosen, I could hit the ground running rather than having to be trained up.
Did I get the job? nope. According to my sources there, they chose a youngster who didn't know the difference between a DVD and a CD; they chose the kid because of his 'limited horizons'; the problem with me? I was over qualified, I might possibly work further up the 'food chain' in terms of management, and I posed a direct threat to their jobs; so of course, they hire someone who is mediocre so that they can maintain their current jobs.
The problem is, there are people out there, like me, who could do the job, and do have the experience to sell things, but instead, they choose the cheaper option, the option of the pimply faced teenager with limited vision and scope as to where they want to go in the future.
Its funny though, every place I've worked at so far, management look at my resume and instantly ask, "why don't you enter IT? you seem well qualified for that area!" to which I explain the situation - Sorry, there are many others out there like me who are qualified in IT, can do the job, but choose not to enter the industry because the industry is full of wankers and tossers; right now, I'm quite happy with where I am, its not IT related, its in retail, I have a dozen people working under me, I set my own hours, I earn more than what I could have in the IT world, and when I perform, I get rewarded by management rather than chatised as with the case of the IT world.
In New Zealand we have EFTPOS; a large network created back in the 1970s by the government owned Databank, which forced all banks to network their systems together via the Reserve Bank to provide speedy transfers of money between customers, banks and the likes.
Today, we have EFTPOS, I can go anywhere in New Zealand with my EFTPOS card and I can access my money either via an EFTPOS machine at either the local service station, pizza chain, and heck, even the pie cart out the front of Wellington station has an EFTPOS machine hooked up to a mobile phone - thus, able to conduct transactions even where there are no telephone lines! I can go online, pay all my bills via the online system, transfer cash between accounts and send money to people.
So this whole 'cashless society' maybe new to Europeans and Americans, but I can assure, in New Zealand, the two largest forms of payment are EFTPOS, followed by Credit Card, then cash, and right behind, and slowly dying, are cheques. When people say 'I'm paying by cheque' the automatic assumption by those at the till is, 'this person doesn't have the money, and is riding on the hope that they'll get cash in the next 5 days' and tend to be wary of accepting it.
I think the biggest dishonesty that the environmental movement have pushed is this idea that we can maintain the same standard of living if we some how pushed all the power plants into the ocean and started using biomass, geothermal (hotrock using water pumped down, and using the steam; as well as naturally occuring steam process), wind, solar and the likes.
I'm sorry, but to cut down on output of CO2s, we first have to hault the growth in energy demand - some how come up with more efficient means of product THEN we must go in the reverse in respects to our energy usage. Now sure, we can go around, turn off lights, keep the temperate level rather than what I see in the US - the house so warm that people are walking around in singlets on.
But with all that 'noble' energy savings, all this will come at a cost to our standard of living; now, I'm quite happy to ride my bike to work, use public transport, use less electricity, but at the same time, are the 6.9billion other inhabitants willing to do that? thats the thing they never answer.
They never answer the amount of CO2 put out during the production of these 'renewable facilities' - as a UK environmentalist said, more pollution is put out during the production of these damn wind farms than the amount of CO2 they would have saved - it seems that these things, and sponsored by government, are nothing more than big bits of propaganda to hide the real problems which we face.
Whilst all this is occuring we have GWB running off to Iraq, spending $500billion of US funds for a war that needn't be fought - imagine if that $500billion was all redirected into R&D for Fusion power - imagine where we would be NOW if that occured; we would already be seeing them designed for coming online in 10 years, hydrogen powered car prototypes would be getting tested, and we would be on the road to sustainable power.
The EU, rather than spending billions upon billions supporting inefficient farmers, they redirected it towards Fusion power, same situation; it seems that government are all very willing to spend money on vote winners like corporate or agricultural welfare, but when it comes to long term funding to address long term, unsexy issues, they seem to go AWOL.
MySQL is a company, they can either go out, do a SUN Microsystems and re-invent the wheel (as the case of their continuously promised, improved sound API that hasn't seen the light of day) and find themselves further behind the eighth ball OR they can go out, find something that is around 70-80% of what they need, and spend a few months writing up the last 20% which the software doesn't address.
Its all about product turn arounds, getting to market, and ensuring that YOU and YOUR company have the best end to end solution money can buy - so compelling that the customer jumps face first into the contract and wants to sign up instantly.
True, but I think people need to also remember these things; in terms of the 'embrace and extend' of the web; the first move was made by Netscape, no one picked up on those 'Netscape only features' because they yieled no benefit to the web developer, the extensions Microsoft introduced is a different story altogether; every man and his dog embrace them - whilst the badmouthing of Microsoft was occuring, why was there more effort put into slamming Microsoft than implementing these extensions?
As for the standards, I thin what alot of people here fail to realise is this; W3C is a committee, and we all know what committee's are like when designing something; just look how long OpenGL 2.0 took to ratify - hardly something I'd put up as an example of how 'working together' is superior than 'going it alone.
As for Microsoft; if they wish to earn some good will; properly document those extensions, explain their reasons for them, and encourage third party developers to make them part of their product and support them.
Microsoft is a very large company in reference to their position in the IT industry, they can either use this position for good, to push development forward, or for evil, to maintain and extend their monopoly.
Babe, do what I do, choose not to watch it; thats
what an adult would do; you have the power right
there in your hands.
Yes, you made that choice to drop television, BUT
at the same time, what gives you the right to some how
unilaterally start imposing your values on those
who may not share them.
Excuse me, but Windows XP Service Pack 2 features had been known for almost over a year before it was release; OVER A YEAR! so you're telling me, as a programmer, than a year to check your code, is impossible? How about Windows NT in a multi-user environment? why don't you test it in a restrictive environment?
These are issues that need to be addressed NOW and yet application vendors wait till the very last minute before making sure their software works with Windows; and Windows Vista will be another disaster with software companies waiting till RTM is made available rather than progressively test their products with Windows Vista as it is developed, making the necessary changes, and possibly back port some of those changes back to their existing products.
That is the problem; and you know what will happen, a few more software vendors will get whiped out as customers get pissed off waiting, and simply adopt a Microsoft solution; Wordperfect/Lotus/Wordstar/Harvard Graphics learned that the hard way by declaring that Microsoft Office was no threat, and Windows 3.1 was just a passing fad - look where we are today; those companies are dead, dying or at laughing status.
Want to be the next victim of the Microsoft jugganaut, then go ahead, treat your customers like crap, fail to update your software, fail to test, and fail to embrace new features Microsoft makes available in their products; you'll find your market share go from dominant, to majority, to minority, then to 'out of business' status.
Well, I wouldn't call it 'preference' but 'orientation', preference would assume there was a conscience decision, as well as assuming that it is about sex, when homosexuality is the attraction - physically and emotionally, to each other.
Anyway, the equivilant of a GLBT guild would be one a African American Guild, or a anything really that brings together of a single common interest; which can be anything from sexual orientation to what they enjoy doing on the week end.
Even for me, as a gay fella, I don't understand what this whole mountain was created out of a molehill; a game is a game, and if people wish to 'advertise their guild', wouldn't the appropriate website be more appropriate than interupting a players game with spam about a particular guild starting?
I've got no worries with a gay guild; its a place where gay players can hang out, chat about 'gay issues' (aka, boyfriend problems) in a general discussion area - some treat online gaming as also a way to develop some online buddies, so for me, I don't have an issue with a GLBT guild per-say.
Hey, I'm not the one who uses 'anonymous coward' because of fear of karma going through the floor
So whilst you're living in your mum and dads basement, twiddling with your doodle whilst playing Quake or some other damn game, I'm out getting laid, having a life, and enjoying myself.
But that isn't the issue; the issue is, they FIX an API so that it works the way its documented, but people expect that they provide compatibility for those who relied on the API when it was broken.
If something is broken, it needs to be fixed; if there is a security hole, the first priority should be to fix the hole, notify ISV's via way of a operating system eratta, and the respective ISV's should then scramble their programmers to test, and provide, if necessary, and update to ensure that customers can continue on like normal.
The problem is, software companies aren't living up to their end of the bargin; the documentation is there, when there are changes, they're listed to; its up to ISV's to stay ontop of the game, and ensure that if and when their software needs to be updated to maintain compatibility, they do so in a timely manner.