I was specifically speaking of cross-time-zone, as opposed to in-house outsourcing.
When doing remote outsourcing, it's often difficult for a traditional project manager to develop a good working rhythm with the development process. So, specifications and timelines must be planned out much more precisely and more ahead of time than when doing in-house work. Further, a remote project manager has to be very good at communicating the vision and expecation that doesn't necessarily translate well into the functional specification.
AFAIK, all outsourcing development shops will furnish you with a project manager that will work in your time-zone if required, however - it's important to keep and pay your own in-house project manager that specializes in remote project management. This is not a cheap specialization. If you rely on the remote project management alone, you may be surprised when your expectations are not exactly met. - The mock-ups come in after two solid weeks of work, and they don't look like your expectation, etc.
That's where a design developer comes in - bridging the gap between technical specifications, and design expactations. You can go back and forth with the outsourcing P.M. on mock-ups, or you can do the mock-ups yourself, and send the full set so work can get started immediately.
While in-house consulting is, technically, outsourcing - when they are local, it's much easier to for the project manager to explain the vision along with the hard specifications - as well as remain deeply involved in the design process.
A lot of murmuring around me has been about big companies being burned by the high (hidden) costs of outsourcing. Especially in programming and IT.
In software, companies are often dismayed by the fact that they get exactly what they ask for and have to pay for it even if it doesn't meet their expectations. So, many companies have had to hire a project manager and design specification developer team for any major project, and the extra salary from these jobs, along with the communications delays that goes with it has often been a break-even situation.
For outsourced IT, those who need 'immediate help' will bother the few tech-savvy (a/k/a knows enough to be dangerous) co-workers instead of being berated for putting in an Outsourced IT ticket. This leads to a cut in those worker's productivity, and often leads to other problems when these folks make symptoms disappear instead of fixing the issue (Pop-Up blockers?).
Some departments of larger companies have hired 'receptionists' that are actually IT people who answer the phone, so that immediate help can be had without being budget dinged by corporate for over-use of outsourced IT.
Of course, the hidden bleed of paying $30k or more for someone who's official job is to answer the phone - just because a department is trying to get around the rules... well, it makes outsourcing a bit expensive all of a sudden.
I'm always hearing from trolls about
how BSD is dying, always with a follup
from several happy BSD users.
Well, the idea that Google is planning
to replace it's USENET archive with a web
groups engine. So, is USENET dying?
Or, more appropriately perhaps, will
Google's dropping of USENET archiving
contribute to a USENET death?
In reality, I don't believe that they are actually going to drop the USENET archiving -- I just think they are likely to make it slightly harder to find. Either way, USENET use has declined significantly over the last several years, I can only see this helping to make it worse.
Www.WebCrawler.com - this was my first search engine. Then it became super commercial, I switched... then it died (only to be resurected under the InfoSpace flag).
AltaVista.Digital.com - this was my second search engine. It's a lesson in everything that can go wrong with a search engine (first - by spinning off from digital). Then by becoming an Ad-Engine.
Google's spot on top is far more precarious than most might think. They've had a long hold, but be sure, those whom use it are likely open to alternatives.
If your statement were blanket truth, then everyone would still be using MSN Search for everything.
What are you new here? One doesn't have to read the article to post.
However, yes, I did read the article. Nick is complaining about Nautilus, and brings up the colors (Gnome is totally theme based) as his only backup. If'n you don't like the colors, you can easily find another theme... most of us regular Gnome users do. If he had put more than a few sentances about colors - then I'd consider that a point to itself. It was featured as a supporting argument, nothing more.
Fine, yes, if you want to modify a theme, it's not as easy as windows. But themes are much more powerful in Gnome than in Windows. So, they trade off configurabilty for ease of use. Eventually, someone will write a decent Theme modifier that can be used by the average human beings.
Both are design choices, that can be fairly bitched about. I did say that he had some good points.
Basically - I was hoping for something more substansive. What Nick wrote sounded like a rant. It was an opinion article, so he is fully in the right.
My conclusion at this point is that the Slashdot link calls the article a review... clearly, it's not. But I sure thought it was when I first posted. So, I'm guilty of not paying attention to the bi-line. That doesn't detract from my comments though, especially as I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who didn't originally see this distinction.
Perhaps for this one thing (remember, at the top I agreed that the author had some good points)... However, what I really would want to know (even in rant form) is all of the places that Gnome needs improvement.
If the authors rant about Nautilus is used as a representative of problems, fine, but tell me so. Basically, if the author doesn't like Nautilus, great... but that isn't very informative.
For every level of technical ability, and every step up the management level - a separation occurs. If I know as much as my staff members, then I don't need them. If I don't recognize this, then I become something much worse than a PHB... a micromanager.
The level above me, they are still PHBs to me. I may not consider myself a PHB, and my staff tells me that I'm not - I still recognize myself as having the potential to be there.
When I loose that recognition of the possibility... then I truly will be one. And my desktop is wood grain Mica.
I appreciate the default Key-Bindings under Gnome. Ctrl-Left to jump to the next desktop is something I really like. Yes, I could do the same thing under KDE... somewhere. But it's a pain.
Further, a lot more applications support Gnome than KDE, so it depends. Most distributions include the support libraries for both, and you end up running KDE AND Gnome, where only one of them controls the actual desktop. If I were to have to choose one without the other, it would be Gnome at this point.
The fact that KDE was a late entry into having an FSF compatible model has hurt in in that facet. However, KDE is quickly catching up.
To be fair to cweditor (I know, fair is not a staple on SlashDot) - I was caught offguard as well.
Slashdot editors, and (possibly) the submitter of the story called it a "review". The article itself, and "cweditor" properly label the story as an opinion.
For myself, i read the Cover of every one of them. Sometimes I find myself partial to reading eWeek deeper, but the format of the magazine is really good for drawing in my pointy haired weak mind.
Please excuse while many of us sit back in suspicion, as opening a new account to post one comment to a story is a common Trolling tactic.
Thank you for being informative, and if you are really whom you claim to be, may I be the first to invite you to join the discussion in other ways. Heck, maybe you could coax Nick to join the discussion.
I'm quite happy to hear that this will be a mid-pages article, especially as - well you've read by now - the narrow target of the article has got some folks a bit up-in-arms.
The reason why I am so vocale, is that I know how I read the tech magazines I'm sent (over 8 per week), and I honestly don't have time to read all the articles. But if a tag strikes my interest on the front page, them I'm likely to open to that article. At that point, I've never once gone to seek additional information from other sources.
What if I were to tell you that my initial interest in Gnome was to replace the CDE on Solaris?
At that time, I didn't even consider using Linux in my place of business. Since then, a lot has changed, but I will fully admit, that from just the text of the article, the summary I got is: 'Gnome is inflexible' and 'backwards'. That's a strong summary, and I'm educated enough (meaning I used Gnome before reading the article) to know better.
On Solaris it isn't a question of Gnome or KDE, it's a question of Common Desktop or Gnome -- I can fully assure you that Gnome is FAR superior to the Common Desktop Environment. Would this article have given me an informed synopsis? No. Would I have taken it for gospel, no - but I would have had the impression that it's not flexible, and no impression of anything good.
To me it's broader than Windows vs. Linux. It's about taking away the ability to process facts, by centering on something that, to me, is the most insignificant feature of a desktop environment... the file manager.
I admitted hearly that I'm a bit of a pointy hair, but I consider myself a very HANDS-ON type. Like I said earlier, the article made some good points.
However, my favorite file manager for Linux is still the command line, closely followed by Midnight Commander (yeah, command line). I've never gotten used to Konqueror (KDE), I've never gotten used to Nautilus. That's to say... I think the both suck.
However, my choice of Desktop (I run KDE at work, and Gnome at home) is pretty undecided. They both have features that I like... at the functionaltiy level. My main problem with the article is that it didn't touch on the things that make it a desktop. Icons, Menus, Task-bars, Desktop switching, key bindings, etc.
Remember, it's not one person's opinion anymore. It's the opinion of a, frankly, well respected publication.
If this makes front page, then a much higher percentage of pointy haired individuals will read it. And -- if on the front page -- the opinion will be taken with even more weight. The article does bring up some good points. If I had never seen Gnome 2.6 myself, I would probably never consider looking at it seriously after reading this article.
After-all, in the opinion of this publication, there's nothing good to say about Gnome 2.6.
Sadly, the article brings up some very
good points, albeit in a very
inflammatory way.
The most damaging part of the
"review" is that it says nothing
aboout Gnome as a whole. It's just a
rant about this user's opinion about
how Nautilus was designed (
changed) to work in 2.6.
This sort of rant, if done
constructively could certainly help
the developers make better choices,
but to put it directly to mass media
as a review just sucks.
Well, as a Pointy Haired type
myself, I can assure you, these mags
hit the coffee table in the lobby -
and very few people actually read
the articles... However, if this
review makes the front page,
Gnome is toast.
I send an offer to enlighten this person to the SpamCop alias. Explaining the only possible ways of signing up, as well as explaining that sometimes, someone signed up prior to dropping their E-mail address (making it available for you to get the same address with any Opt-Ins that were left behind).
I give this person a valid Email address and Phone number so that they can contact me directly with any questions related to this complaint.
Finally, I include an offer to investigate the time, date and method by which the sign-up occurred, but that I would need that person's Email address to do so.
I also copy my ISP and SpamCop on the Email if either of them are investigating.
Only to Canada... I don't qualify, so I see no value there. Quite an incentive to keep it in the homeland though. Shipping for these things has to be near $1000 freight.
I just thought of this (I'm probably slow), but wouldn't Ripley's want them? The first suit was featured on their show, it would seem like the type of site-gag that you'd see in a "Ripley's Believe it or Not" storefront museum.
But seriously, how could anyone explain that expenditure to thier [[ parent, sibling, lover, financial-advisor, ""normal"" friends, Dean Cain or the SlashDot community ]], who would all surely chide and make fun of your rather eclectic taste for wasting money, while being jealous of your ability to waste said money?
Zero bids? I can't say I'm that surprised.
Afterall, aren't these things just a little silly?
Maybe it's just me, but a 'starting' bid of $5000
with a reserve is a bit much for something
with no practicle use.
Definately, the mystique of a case mod is made completely lame by factory installation.
After-all, mod = modify. If it was just the windows, lights and custom fans that made case mods cool, then we'd call them case accessories, or some-other innane term.
However, there are plenty of die-hard gamers who have no clue as to what to do inside their computers. These folks buy 'gaming PCs'. Of course, the popular ones don't include pre-fab 'case mods', just seats for where case-mods could go.
Slashdot Mirror
When doing remote outsourcing, it's often difficult for a traditional project manager to develop a good working rhythm with the development process. So, specifications and timelines must be planned out much more precisely and more ahead of time than when doing in-house work. Further, a remote project manager has to be very good at communicating the vision and expecation that doesn't necessarily translate well into the functional specification.
AFAIK, all outsourcing development shops will furnish you with a project manager that will work in your time-zone if required, however - it's important to keep and pay your own in-house project manager that specializes in remote project management. This is not a cheap specialization. If you rely on the remote project management alone, you may be surprised when your expectations are not exactly met. - The mock-ups come in after two solid weeks of work, and they don't look like your expectation, etc.
That's where a design developer comes in - bridging the gap between technical specifications, and design expactations. You can go back and forth with the outsourcing P.M. on mock-ups, or you can do the mock-ups yourself, and send the full set so work can get started immediately.
While in-house consulting is, technically, outsourcing - when they are local, it's much easier to for the project manager to explain the vision along with the hard specifications - as well as remain deeply involved in the design process.
In software, companies are often dismayed by the fact that they get exactly what they ask for and have to pay for it even if it doesn't meet their expectations. So, many companies have had to hire a project manager and design specification developer team for any major project, and the extra salary from these jobs, along with the communications delays that goes with it has often been a break-even situation.
For outsourced IT, those who need 'immediate help' will bother the few tech-savvy (a/k/a knows enough to be dangerous) co-workers instead of being berated for putting in an Outsourced IT ticket. This leads to a cut in those worker's productivity, and often leads to other problems when these folks make symptoms disappear instead of fixing the issue (Pop-Up blockers?).
Some departments of larger companies have hired 'receptionists' that are actually IT people who answer the phone, so that immediate help can be had without being budget dinged by corporate for over-use of outsourced IT.
Of course, the hidden bleed of paying $30k or more for someone who's official job is to answer the phone - just because a department is trying to get around the rules... well, it makes outsourcing a bit expensive all of a sudden.
Concerning Google, I just don't think the peoples faith in Google is as strong as faith in the religious sense.
I'm always hearing from trolls about how BSD is dying, always with a follup from several happy BSD users.
Well, the idea that Google is planning to replace it's USENET archive with a web groups engine. So, is USENET dying? Or, more appropriately perhaps, will Google's dropping of USENET archiving contribute to a USENET death?
In reality, I don't believe that they are actually going to drop the USENET archiving -- I just think they are likely to make it slightly harder to find. Either way, USENET use has declined significantly over the last several years, I can only see this helping to make it worse.
AltaVista.Digital.com - this was my second search engine. It's a lesson in everything that can go wrong with a search engine (first - by spinning off from digital). Then by becoming an Ad-Engine.
Google's spot on top is far more precarious than most might think. They've had a long hold, but be sure, those whom use it are likely open to alternatives.
If your statement were blanket truth, then everyone would still be using MSN Search for everything.
However, yes, I did read the article. Nick is complaining about Nautilus, and brings up the colors (Gnome is totally theme based) as his only backup. If'n you don't like the colors, you can easily find another theme... most of us regular Gnome users do. If he had put more than a few sentances about colors - then I'd consider that a point to itself. It was featured as a supporting argument, nothing more.
Fine, yes, if you want to modify a theme, it's not as easy as windows. But themes are much more powerful in Gnome than in Windows. So, they trade off configurabilty for ease of use. Eventually, someone will write a decent Theme modifier that can be used by the average human beings.
Both are design choices, that can be fairly bitched about. I did say that he had some good points.
Basically - I was hoping for something more substansive. What Nick wrote sounded like a rant. It was an opinion article, so he is fully in the right.
My conclusion at this point is that the Slashdot link calls the article a review... clearly, it's not. But I sure thought it was when I first posted. So, I'm guilty of not paying attention to the bi-line. That doesn't detract from my comments though, especially as I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who didn't originally see this distinction.
If the authors rant about Nautilus is used as a representative of problems, fine, but tell me so. Basically, if the author doesn't like Nautilus, great... but that isn't very informative.
Nice to know that KDE is a choice there now as well.
The level above me, they are still PHBs to me. I may not consider myself a PHB, and my staff tells me that I'm not - I still recognize myself as having the potential to be there.
When I loose that recognition of the possibility... then I truly will be one. And my desktop is wood grain Mica.
Further, a lot more applications support Gnome than KDE, so it depends. Most distributions include the support libraries for both, and you end up running KDE AND Gnome, where only one of them controls the actual desktop. If I were to have to choose one without the other, it would be Gnome at this point.
The fact that KDE was a late entry into having an FSF compatible model has hurt in in that facet. However, KDE is quickly catching up.
Slashdot editors, and (possibly) the submitter of the story called it a "review". The article itself, and "cweditor" properly label the story as an opinion.
But then again, I mostly use the command line, or if I'm feeling really GUI, I might bring up Midnight Commander.
For myself, i read the Cover of every one of them. Sometimes I find myself partial to reading eWeek deeper, but the format of the magazine is really good for drawing in my pointy haired weak mind.
Thank you for being informative, and if you are really whom you claim to be, may I be the first to invite you to join the discussion in other ways. Heck, maybe you could coax Nick to join the discussion.
I'm quite happy to hear that this will be a mid-pages article, especially as - well you've read by now - the narrow target of the article has got some folks a bit up-in-arms.
The reason why I am so vocale, is that I know how I read the tech magazines I'm sent (over 8 per week), and I honestly don't have time to read all the articles. But if a tag strikes my interest on the front page, them I'm likely to open to that article. At that point, I've never once gone to seek additional information from other sources.
At that time, I didn't even consider using Linux in my place of business. Since then, a lot has changed, but I will fully admit, that from just the text of the article, the summary I got is: 'Gnome is inflexible' and 'backwards'. That's a strong summary, and I'm educated enough (meaning I used Gnome before reading the article) to know better.
On Solaris it isn't a question of Gnome or KDE, it's a question of Common Desktop or Gnome -- I can fully assure you that Gnome is FAR superior to the Common Desktop Environment. Would this article have given me an informed synopsis? No. Would I have taken it for gospel, no - but I would have had the impression that it's not flexible, and no impression of anything good.
To me it's broader than Windows vs. Linux. It's about taking away the ability to process facts, by centering on something that, to me, is the most insignificant feature of a desktop environment ... the file manager.
However, my favorite file manager for Linux is still the command line, closely followed by Midnight Commander (yeah, command line). I've never gotten used to Konqueror (KDE), I've never gotten used to Nautilus. That's to say... I think the both suck.
However, my choice of Desktop (I run KDE at work, and Gnome at home) is pretty undecided. They both have features that I like ... at the functionaltiy level. My main problem with the article is that it didn't touch on the things that make it a desktop. Icons, Menus, Task-bars, Desktop switching, key bindings, etc.
But don't underestimate the power of a PHB.
- PHBs run commercial distributions, too
- PHBs can dictate what is on the Linux servers within their own department.
- PHBs can mentor their Employees in Linux, and teach a newbie, 'Don't select Gnome, it's not flexible'.
If the mentality spreads, then it becomes truth. It's not death, it's toast. Welcome to the popularity levels of Fluxbox.If this makes front page, then a much higher percentage of pointy haired individuals will read it. And -- if on the front page -- the opinion will be taken with even more weight. The article does bring up some good points. If I had never seen Gnome 2.6 myself, I would probably never consider looking at it seriously after reading this article.
After-all, in the opinion of this publication, there's nothing good to say about Gnome 2.6.
Sadly, the article brings up some very good points, albeit in a very inflammatory way.
The most damaging part of the "review" is that it says nothing aboout Gnome as a whole. It's just a rant about this user's opinion about how Nautilus was designed ( changed) to work in 2.6.
This sort of rant, if done constructively could certainly help the developers make better choices, but to put it directly to mass media as a review just sucks.
Well, as a Pointy Haired type myself, I can assure you, these mags hit the coffee table in the lobby - and very few people actually read the articles... However, if this review makes the front page, Gnome is toast.
I send an offer to enlighten this person to the SpamCop alias. Explaining the only possible ways of signing up, as well as explaining that sometimes, someone signed up prior to dropping their E-mail address (making it available for you to get the same address with any Opt-Ins that were left behind).
I give this person a valid Email address and Phone number so that they can contact me directly with any questions related to this complaint. Finally, I include an offer to investigate the time, date and method by which the sign-up occurred, but that I would need that person's Email address to do so.
I also copy my ISP and SpamCop on the Email if either of them are investigating.
Only to Canada... I don't qualify, so I see no value there. Quite an incentive to keep it in the homeland though. Shipping for these things has to be near $1000 freight.
I just thought of this (I'm probably slow), but wouldn't Ripley's want them? The first suit was featured on their show, it would seem like the type of site-gag that you'd see in a "Ripley's Believe it or Not" storefront museum.
But seriously, how could anyone explain that expenditure to thier [[ parent, sibling, lover, financial-advisor, ""normal"" friends, Dean Cain or the SlashDot community ]], who would all surely chide and make fun of your rather eclectic taste for wasting money, while being jealous of your ability to waste said money?
Zero bids? I can't say I'm that surprised. Afterall, aren't these things just a little silly? Maybe it's just me, but a 'starting' bid of $5000 with a reserve is a bit much for something with no practicle use.
After-all, mod = modify. If it was just the windows, lights and custom fans that made case mods cool, then we'd call them case accessories, or some-other innane term.
However, there are plenty of die-hard gamers who have no clue as to what to do inside their computers. These folks buy 'gaming PCs'. Of course, the popular ones don't include pre-fab 'case mods', just seats for where case-mods could go.