Absolutely, but it's all part of the balancing act.
A phone call is one of the very best things to do if the person you are communicating with is someone you almost never see, such as a resource from a partner company. In this case, I will typically call instead of sending the first reminder email that I would normally send. Some people are great about responding promptly to the initial email and I find that emailing with those people is often as friendly and effective as phone calls. You also have to watch out for people who are of the opinion that "if it's not on paper/in an email, it doesn't exist." Your boss may be one, and the person who is supposed to be answering the questions may be another. I've actually had people disavow answers they've given me over the phone.
Things are much more complicated if the person you are asking questions of is in the office with you. When communication breaks down to the point that you are sending reminder emails, I consider it to be purely for "paper trail" at that point. After sending a first reminder, I will almost never phone them about it or approach them in person, unless it's at a meeting directly related to the pending responses. Most of the time, they know that you are doing your due diligence and generating a paper trail, and they don't mind, but they really are just too busy to get back to you at the moment. Approaching them in person comes off as "hey, I'm important enough to demand your time, so why the hell don't you come clean on those answers I've been bugging you about?"
Like many things, every situation requires a personal touch. Business = people.
This may be my number one pet peeve when it comes to professional communication. I have tried a number of ways of getting multiple questions to register, but nothing seems to be perfectly effective. The best tactic I've managed to come up with is including only the following in the body of an email:
1. A preamble, no longer than two sentences, that says something along the lines of "[Person's name here], I need your response to the following questions by [date]:". Using their name is key, even if no one else is on the To: or CC: line. 2. A *numbered* list of questions (not bulleted), each ending in a question mark.
The other thing I've started doing is keeping a running list called "waiting on" that serves the sole purpose of listing the responses and tasks I'm waiting on from other people, no matter how small. As a consultant, I've found that "due diligence" means "one reminder email at least every other work day" when it comes to getting questions answered. Otherwise, getting chewed out for not adequately following up is a very real possibility. I've been asked for a paper trail before, and I always get a laugh of approval when I spool out the reams of email I've sent trying to get the simplest questions answered.
If you ever set up a Linux machine for a newbie friend, just rename the shortcuts for all the common applications to their Microsoft/Windows counterparts. "Internet Explorer", "Word," "Excel", etc. Just tell them its the Linux version and they'll get it.
"There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such a profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is supported by neither statute or common law. Neither corporations or individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back." - Robert Heinlein, Life Line, 1939
Not intended to be any kind of argument or assertion, but it seemed appropriate given your post, and I like it, especially considering that it's 70 years old and is so relevant today.
I'm almost positive that VCDControlTool doesn't work in Vista or Win7, and while it does the job pretty well in XP, it's a pretty unpolished utility. Easy, integrated ISO mounting is long overdue.
This is great, but I still don't see ISO mounting, which (as far as I know) has been asked for repeatedly by power users everywhere, and is one of (if not *the*) top request on Connect.
Funny you should say that; I think a comparison between the registry and a command line interface is pretty valid. Powerful if you know how to use it, dangerous if you don't, and a lot of people use it only when given specific instructions (a specific key or command) by someone else.
I can't believe more people haven't pointed this out. Upgrading Vista to 7 seems a lot like upgrading Leopard to Snow Leopard. I imagine the price point for such an upgrade will likely be similar.
I see your point. I was looking at it from a different perspective - object oriented "programming" vs "design." You are correct, a system of networked services cannot be perceived as object oriented. I was looking more at the implementation of each application.
What would the benefit be of designing a network of services to function in an object oriented fashion? Providers and consumers trading data may have wildly different uses for it, making it pointless to define anything above and beyond a contract strictly for data.
Trying to find drivers on some website, and running some installer hoping it won't clobber over files managed by apt/dpkg is not my idea of family fun.
"Trying to find drivers on some website" sucks? Where the hell did you find "apt-get install nvidia-kernel-2.6-amd64 nvidia-glx nvidia-settings"?
A non-power user at least has a shot at understanding one of those things.
While this is great, these statistics show that an Ubuntu user is not (yet) as useful to the community as a Debian user.
Ubuntu users are just as useful to the community as any other Linux user because they *generate* these statistics. They are the non-power users that Linux so desperately needs to cater to.
People don't need to report bugs, test new features and amend documentation to be useful. If the prevailing attitude about Linux continues to be "you need to be useful to the community if you are going to use Linux, and you can only be useful by actively participating in it's development", then Linux evangelists are going to continue to scare away new users.
Most Windows users don't contribute to their community in this way, but they are still useful by virtue of the fact that they use Windows. Windows is useful for the same reason that the telephone is - everyone else has it too. The Linux community needs to embrace the network effect and focus on getting people on board.
The parent's point is that if it wasn't buggy, it wouldn't exist for years and years yet.
The market has shown that it will tolerate buggy software, so that's what ships and what sells. If the market wasn't that way, we'd have software that worked a hell of a lot better with a lot fewer features.
Good for the people using WordPerfect on those 386's. Seriously, that's not sarcasm - modernizing for the sake of modernizing is a plague. But when we're talking about new features, new capabilities, and scales that require the newest software and hardware, buggy software is going to win the day, simply because it *exists* by virtue of the fact that someone wanted to get it out the door.
(and unfortunately, a lot of business players have forgotten how to make and sell those).
I was going to say that this isn't true at all, but I thought about it for a minute and realized that it is true, unless you're Nintendo. I feel like the third parties rely solely on cover appeal, but there's a reason. Games that aren't big-budget don't get big-budget advertising either - it's one of those business things where they shoot themselves in the foot trying to get the dollar figures to line up appropriately, even though it makes zero sense. In their eyes, it's too risky to create a larger budget for advertising when the game is low budget. They don't see games like we do, they see dollar-in, dollar-out.
To a lot of people complaining, those games you list *are* mini-games. As in, not beefy games - the blockbuster ones that really drive things. In this context, the definition of mini-game has changed, and has glommed together with portions of "casual game," "low budget game, "shallow game" and "simple game."
The Wii's problem is that it isn't getting any "epic" games on a regular schedule, which are what are getting all the hype and praise right now.
Gears of War 2 LBP Rock Band and GHWT Fallout 3 Dead Space
These are the games that get magazine covers, breathless previews, dedicated forums, etc. They have big budgets, huge graphics, and online features out the wazoo. They pop up every couple of months on the 360 and PS3, and there are a ton right now because the holiday season is approaching. How many Wii games get this treatment? To my eyes, the answer is 0.
I like to think I've got a pretty good perspective on this. I have a Wii that's been sitting unplugged now for months, and a 360 that I haven't played in a month or so. I like games, but lately I've been too busy or lazy to play them. I still keep up with game news though, so I do graze those magazine covers, Metacritic reviews, and I see the forums that spring up dedicated to a single game.
So if all that is the case, why does the Wii do so well? That "hype and praise" I mentioned in the first paragraph doesn't mean *shit* to a lot of people buying Wii games. Someone that sees Wii Music or Wii Fit on TV once, thinks "oh a new disk for my game box!", has the cash and picks it up for the *experience*, even if that experience only gets revived from the closet floor once every two months when friends are over (they didn't really think about that when they got it - these aren't the cash-starved teenagers and college kids that seem to dictate the market and the web climate for the "serious" games).
The Wii is a toy. I don't mean that in a bad or degrading way, but it's the best way to compare it to the other consoles. It's a toy with different marketing and audience goals than the consoles. It's a toy that's sold like gangbusters and really shows no signs of slowing. We've hit the Internet age and computers still intimidate the hell out of a huge amount of people - the friendly white box plugs straight into your TV, and you don't need to buy anything else, read instructions, or figure out what the 15 buttons and analog sticks do to start waving the magic wand around and having fun.
If you're a "hardcore" gamer, the "Wii problem" is simple. Unlike the 360 and the PS3, you need to look at the Wii games that are available and what's on the horizon - look past the magazine covers, read some reviews. See a few things that are interesting and willing to spend the money? Get one. Otherwise don't. People need to get it through their heads - Nintendo doesn't care about you. They care about selling systems and games, and they are doing a pretty damn good job despite the "teeming masses" of people online complaining to them - those masses in actuality are a minority, and not even a vocal one at that, because most people can't hear them.
The motion detection is the much smaller problem. One-to-one motion simply isn't possible because there's nothing to stop you from swinging when your sword hits your opponent's.
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely, but it's all part of the balancing act.
A phone call is one of the very best things to do if the person you are communicating with is someone you almost never see, such as a resource from a partner company. In this case, I will typically call instead of sending the first reminder email that I would normally send. Some people are great about responding promptly to the initial email and I find that emailing with those people is often as friendly and effective as phone calls. You also have to watch out for people who are of the opinion that "if it's not on paper/in an email, it doesn't exist." Your boss may be one, and the person who is supposed to be answering the questions may be another. I've actually had people disavow answers they've given me over the phone.
Things are much more complicated if the person you are asking questions of is in the office with you. When communication breaks down to the point that you are sending reminder emails, I consider it to be purely for "paper trail" at that point. After sending a first reminder, I will almost never phone them about it or approach them in person, unless it's at a meeting directly related to the pending responses. Most of the time, they know that you are doing your due diligence and generating a paper trail, and they don't mind, but they really are just too busy to get back to you at the moment. Approaching them in person comes off as "hey, I'm important enough to demand your time, so why the hell don't you come clean on those answers I've been bugging you about?"
Like many things, every situation requires a personal touch. Business = people.
This may be my number one pet peeve when it comes to professional communication. I have tried a number of ways of getting multiple questions to register, but nothing seems to be perfectly effective. The best tactic I've managed to come up with is including only the following in the body of an email:
1. A preamble, no longer than two sentences, that says something along the lines of "[Person's name here], I need your response to the following questions by [date]:". Using their name is key, even if no one else is on the To: or CC: line.
2. A *numbered* list of questions (not bulleted), each ending in a question mark.
The other thing I've started doing is keeping a running list called "waiting on" that serves the sole purpose of listing the responses and tasks I'm waiting on from other people, no matter how small. As a consultant, I've found that "due diligence" means "one reminder email at least every other work day" when it comes to getting questions answered. Otherwise, getting chewed out for not adequately following up is a very real possibility. I've been asked for a paper trail before, and I always get a laugh of approval when I spool out the reams of email I've sent trying to get the simplest questions answered.
Looks like the Apple Product Cycle may have to be revised slightly.
Been saying this for ages. Windows' value is network externality.
If you want Linux to gain marketshare, stop worrying about how things got to where they are and start thinking about how to compete.
If you ever set up a Linux machine for a newbie friend, just rename the shortcuts for all the common applications to their Microsoft/Windows counterparts. "Internet Explorer", "Word," "Excel", etc. Just tell them its the Linux version and they'll get it.
"There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such a profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is supported by neither statute or common law. Neither corporations or individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back."
- Robert Heinlein, Life Line, 1939
Not intended to be any kind of argument or assertion, but it seemed appropriate given your post, and I like it, especially considering that it's 70 years old and is so relevant today.
I'm almost positive that VCDControlTool doesn't work in Vista or Win7, and while it does the job pretty well in XP, it's a pretty unpolished utility. Easy, integrated ISO mounting is long overdue.
This is great, but I still don't see ISO mounting, which (as far as I know) has been asked for repeatedly by power users everywhere, and is one of (if not *the*) top request on Connect.
They understand it just fine. They just think it's stupid, because they like money.
I'd submit mine for Linux but I can't figure out who to send it to.
brain surgery and rocket science
Funny you should say that; I think a comparison between the registry and a command line interface is pretty valid. Powerful if you know how to use it, dangerous if you don't, and a lot of people use it only when given specific instructions (a specific key or command) by someone else.
See how much of *anything* they could do.
That's not a good thing.
Like Snow Leopard?
I can't believe more people haven't pointed this out. Upgrading Vista to 7 seems a lot like upgrading Leopard to Snow Leopard. I imagine the price point for such an upgrade will likely be similar.
I see your point. I was looking at it from a different perspective - object oriented "programming" vs "design." You are correct, a system of networked services cannot be perceived as object oriented. I was looking more at the implementation of each application.
What would the benefit be of designing a network of services to function in an object oriented fashion? Providers and consumers trading data may have wildly different uses for it, making it pointless to define anything above and beyond a contract strictly for data.
SOA has nothing to do with what kind of programming paradigm is used.
Trying to find drivers on some website, and running some installer hoping it won't clobber over files managed by apt/dpkg is not my idea of family fun.
"Trying to find drivers on some website" sucks? Where the hell did you find "apt-get install nvidia-kernel-2.6-amd64 nvidia-glx nvidia-settings"?
A non-power user at least has a shot at understanding one of those things.
While this is great, these statistics show that an Ubuntu user is not (yet) as useful to the community as a Debian user.
Ubuntu users are just as useful to the community as any other Linux user because they *generate* these statistics. They are the non-power users that Linux so desperately needs to cater to.
People don't need to report bugs, test new features and amend documentation to be useful. If the prevailing attitude about Linux continues to be "you need to be useful to the community if you are going to use Linux, and you can only be useful by actively participating in it's development", then Linux evangelists are going to continue to scare away new users.
Most Windows users don't contribute to their community in this way, but they are still useful by virtue of the fact that they use Windows. Windows is useful for the same reason that the telephone is - everyone else has it too. The Linux community needs to embrace the network effect and focus on getting people on board.
Software today is so damn buggy.
The parent's point is that if it wasn't buggy, it wouldn't exist for years and years yet.
The market has shown that it will tolerate buggy software, so that's what ships and what sells. If the market wasn't that way, we'd have software that worked a hell of a lot better with a lot fewer features.
Good for the people using WordPerfect on those 386's. Seriously, that's not sarcasm - modernizing for the sake of modernizing is a plague. But when we're talking about new features, new capabilities, and scales that require the newest software and hardware, buggy software is going to win the day, simply because it *exists* by virtue of the fact that someone wanted to get it out the door.
I still see no reason to move from the Amazon MP3 store. Is there anything that makes iTMS superior?
If someone wanted to pay me 3million for my piece of crap car, I would sell it for half that
If someone wanted to pay me 3 million for my car, I'd let them.
What is it you're trying to see: the outcome of the elections, or the action (or lack thereof)?
(and unfortunately, a lot of business players have forgotten how to make and sell those).
I was going to say that this isn't true at all, but I thought about it for a minute and realized that it is true, unless you're Nintendo. I feel like the third parties rely solely on cover appeal, but there's a reason. Games that aren't big-budget don't get big-budget advertising either - it's one of those business things where they shoot themselves in the foot trying to get the dollar figures to line up appropriately, even though it makes zero sense. In their eyes, it's too risky to create a larger budget for advertising when the game is low budget. They don't see games like we do, they see dollar-in, dollar-out.
To a lot of people complaining, those games you list *are* mini-games. As in, not beefy games - the blockbuster ones that really drive things. In this context, the definition of mini-game has changed, and has glommed together with portions of "casual game," "low budget game, "shallow game" and "simple game."
The Wii's problem is that it isn't getting any "epic" games on a regular schedule, which are what are getting all the hype and praise right now.
Gears of War 2
LBP
Rock Band and GHWT
Fallout 3
Dead Space
These are the games that get magazine covers, breathless previews, dedicated forums, etc. They have big budgets, huge graphics, and online features out the wazoo. They pop up every couple of months on the 360 and PS3, and there are a ton right now because the holiday season is approaching. How many Wii games get this treatment? To my eyes, the answer is 0.
I like to think I've got a pretty good perspective on this. I have a Wii that's been sitting unplugged now for months, and a 360 that I haven't played in a month or so. I like games, but lately I've been too busy or lazy to play them. I still keep up with game news though, so I do graze those magazine covers, Metacritic reviews, and I see the forums that spring up dedicated to a single game.
So if all that is the case, why does the Wii do so well? That "hype and praise" I mentioned in the first paragraph doesn't mean *shit* to a lot of people buying Wii games. Someone that sees Wii Music or Wii Fit on TV once, thinks "oh a new disk for my game box!", has the cash and picks it up for the *experience*, even if that experience only gets revived from the closet floor once every two months when friends are over (they didn't really think about that when they got it - these aren't the cash-starved teenagers and college kids that seem to dictate the market and the web climate for the "serious" games).
The Wii is a toy. I don't mean that in a bad or degrading way, but it's the best way to compare it to the other consoles. It's a toy with different marketing and audience goals than the consoles. It's a toy that's sold like gangbusters and really shows no signs of slowing. We've hit the Internet age and computers still intimidate the hell out of a huge amount of people - the friendly white box plugs straight into your TV, and you don't need to buy anything else, read instructions, or figure out what the 15 buttons and analog sticks do to start waving the magic wand around and having fun.
If you're a "hardcore" gamer, the "Wii problem" is simple. Unlike the 360 and the PS3, you need to look at the Wii games that are available and what's on the horizon - look past the magazine covers, read some reviews. See a few things that are interesting and willing to spend the money? Get one. Otherwise don't. People need to get it through their heads - Nintendo doesn't care about you. They care about selling systems and games, and they are doing a pretty damn good job despite the "teeming masses" of people online complaining to them - those masses in actuality are a minority, and not even a vocal one at that, because most people can't hear them.
The motion detection is the much smaller problem. One-to-one motion simply isn't possible because there's nothing to stop you from swinging when your sword hits your opponent's.