"I bought all the 3rd ed books already after all... it seems stingy to charge users twice."
And if you want to be "current", you're going to have to buy all the 3E books again. WotC is releasing what they call 3.5E -- updates to the three core rulebooks (PHB, DMG, and MM). Going forward, only the 3.5E system will be supported.
There is no trade-in or rebate offer for owners of the previous edition. So you're going to have to pay for 3E "twice" either way.
In this case, Digital Restrictions Management means that documents won't be available to other systems. If you get an email (or Word document), it'll either be encrypted and only usable on the computer it was sent to, or the software won't allow it to be transferred to an unverified system.
Cut and paste can be disable for "secure" documents/emails. The window showing "secure" documents could just be excluded from screenshots. Considering that Microsoft controls the OS, office software, and has influence on hardware manufacturers, they can implement any level of "features".
Without cracking open a secured computer, probably the only ways to bypass the security would be sniffing network packets (easily defeated) or using a camera to photograph the screen.
The first problem with the benchmarks is that all of the systems had 512 MB of RAM. While that's the best way to gauge raw CPU power, the problem is that very few systems had anything near that level of power. IIRC, I spent somewhere between $50 and $100 USD back in 1998 for 64 megs -- outfitting a PC with 512 megs would have been prohibitively expensive. While it's nice to look at the benchmarks as a "best case" scenario, older CPUs would have performed much worse due to swapping.
Also, while the Pentium II is mentioned in Intel's history, it's not in the benchmarks. The Celeron used the same core, but with a differnt L2 cache setup (2nd generation Celerons had 128 KB at full CPU speed, while the P2 had 512 KB at half CPU speed).
"There will still be the vast majority who DO NOT UPGRADE and use THE OLD STANDARD. "
This is true -- according to Google's Zeitgeist, the number of people using "obsolete" versions of Windows (95, 98, NT) is almost the same as those using the latest versions (2000 and XP).
"I really can't see how this will effect people who don't use it (now tell me how it will take over the world when people do start to use it and how it will effect the data on the internet and bla bla bal....)"
Easy. If broadband ISPs only allow Palladium-equipped devices (PCs, routers, etc) online, then the Internet will be denied to everyone else. Should Microsoft make their own version of IPv6 that's "secure", it's going to be supported by all the major players. (If the MS-IPv6 protocol can't be altered through software, then any company that doesn't support the corrupted protocol is going to be locked out from all new PCs once IPv6 goes live.)
Even easier: sites that currently "require" Internet Explorer -- but work fine with other browsers -- will require IE plus Palladium. Or your ISP says that only PCs with Palladium are supported.
If Microsoft plays their hand correctly, they'll be in complete control of the x86 platform, and nothing other than a successful anti-trust case will break that hold. If Microsoft fails, they'll alienate enough people that Linux and other OS's will make significant gains.
But what if M$ tries to get in the Linux market? Would you guys use it? I mean, is it about Linux to you guys or strictly OSS?
There's a lot of reasons Linux/OSS users don't use Microsoft:
Source code isn't commonly available for review and/or modification, leaving open the possibility of backdoors or undocumented API's.
Licensing and EULA shenanigans
Cost
MS software not playing nice with others (file formats, drive formats, etc)
Reliability and security
Even if those issues were addressed, it doesn't change the fact that Microsoft's history has been one of "extend and embrace". Regardless of how good their Linux products would/could be, it would be difficult to accept them unless Microsoft changes as a company.
Assuming my (rusty) French is correct, GETax software isn't offered specifically for Linux, but there's a PDF version that's usable with Mandrake (and other distros with XPDF).
All three versions of OpenOffice and Mozilla will fit on one CD-R.
Why would I try to overpopulate yet another medium to tell mom and dad I'm OK while there are emergency sevices that might have used the bandwidth to communicate something more meaningful? If I'm OK, I will be OK...
You make a lot of assumptions in your statement.
First, no personal emergency communications should ever go on an emergency or restricted band. While I'm not a radio expert, most of the fire department radios I've seen can't make major changes in frequency like the radios on Star Trek do. It's unlikely that using CB or HAM radio is going to make things difficult for the authorities.
Second, you're assuming the situation is static -- people are either OK, or they're not. In the case of natural disasters (flood, tornado, hurricane), someone may assume they're alright, but the situation could change in hours (or minutes in the case of tornado). That backup communications system may be the only way to call for help.
Third, the communications you provide may be important for the people "down the line". Spreading word about the effected areas may help other people avoid clogged roads, or know that loved ones in other areas are alright.
Fourth, many humans are social creatures with responsibilities beyond themselves. Worrying about a loved one is nearly as bad as hearing that they died. If the person is a victim -- either injured or a fatality -- there will be numerous arrangements to be made. Just because you live in your parents basement;) don't begrudge families the ability (or desire) to stay in touch.
"The question they fail to ask, though, is: why do people waste part of their eight hour day?"
Some services (especially banks and physicians) are only available for a small part of the day. There may be some overlap, but what can you do when a customer-service line or bank closes at 4:00PM and you don't get out of work until 5:30PM?
Slowdowns during the day aren't uncommon. As someone else said, when you're waiting for a program to compile, it's an opportunity to look at the Internet or personal email. There can be a brief lull between meetings, waiting for coworkers, etc.
do we still need the traditional eight-hour work day?
Try collaborating with a group in a different timezone -- preferably overseas. When you only have an hour or two when everyone is "in the office", organization and communication becomes difficult and slow. The same thing would happen if everyone picked their own hours and days.
I honestly don't think that sharing broadband is the primary motivation for most people. Sharing a single computer for Internet access is acceptable until you get used to every computer in the house being networked. And I've seen some SOHO routers that had a serial port for connecting to an external modem.
I think broadband's big advantages for the non-technical user is convenience and (relative) value. Having an always-on connection is much nicer than waiting for a modem to dial (and possibly redial)... and the phone line isn't "in use" with broadband. Also, paying $40-$100 a month for broadband is easy to justify based on speed; while it may not be 30 times faster, you can do more with broadband simultaneously than you can with dialup.
Being able to toss a router between my LAN and cable modem is a major benefit to having broadband, but I doubt that the average would be capable of doing it without help.
The utility company is owned by the city, so the money consumers spend stays in the town. The city has "made" $32 million that would otherwise have gone to the cable companies and/or ISPs.
Damage would be much worse if these things started cleaning hard drives after the action (yeah yeah, backups - just like all your databases always have the latest patches, right?)
I would think that damage would be worse if the worm just sat quietly for a few weeks (or even months), slowly corrupting data in the database. At that point, backups may not be usable; at some point either the last backup media has been recycled, or new entries to the database would be too expensive to re-enter.
A "stealth" worm, whose primary focus is remaining undetected rather than consuming huge amounts of resources would be a lot more devastating than an obvious one.
I'd advise against having a bootable distro. While it seems like a good idea now, in a few years the distro will be dated may not be able to support the latest hardware. (Of course, that assumes the CD-Rs actually last that long:) And who will do the troubleshooting if if fails to boot properly on Uncle Fred's PC?
Also, people will have their own software for viewing pictures and movies. Why force a slideshow on someone who'd rather view the pics in Photoshop, MS Photo Editor or Gimp?
"This is one example of how our society is breeding the destruction of mother earth."
The problem IMHO isn't that the chips use a lot of resources to create, it's that they're disposable and lose their value in a few years. I wouldn't be bothered so much if this level of resources was spent on a durable good, but within 5-10 years (being optimistic) most of these chips will be trashed. A house requires a lot more resources to build, but can last decades (or hundreds of years) if well-constructed.
How many people (and companies) have sticks of RAM that they can't use, either because all of their motherboard's slots are full, or because it can't be used in the latest and greatest computers?
"Aren't there other means for chip production? "
I'm sure there are -- if you want to pay significantly more.
"As for a tracking system, the last company I worked for (in IT) used Vantive as their helpdesk system."
I'm too far removed from my helpdesk days -- working in one, or closely with one -- to remember any of the specific software that was used, but just about anything that stores the data and allows it to be summarized is better than nothing.
At one point, I even wrote a quick and dirty app for the other developers in my department to use. Nothing formal, but it tracked time spent, severity, and contact information. All the info we needed to give to managers for changes to happen.:)
"Credibility - Until the users see them as useful, they aren't. Once there is some confidence that they are competent and helpful, users will stop bypassing them and developers will stop letting users bypass them."
Apply serious penalties for anyone who bypasses the system. Management has to be on board for it to work, but if the sales department keeps using developers for low-level support, either charge them for the time or alter the deadlines. It sounds unreasonable, but that's the only way to make changes stick.
Have the developers track their work, including "helpdesk" duties. Once you can show that how their time is being (ab)used, it's easier to get management interested. (I was in a similar situation, and once my manager saw that 30-50% of my time was spent doing helpdesk work instead of coding, things started to change.)
One thing to remember is that developers will always be in the support loop. They may not be Level-1 support, but serious or techinically-involved problems are best solved by the developers.
"Poor Processes - The help desk is supposed to be able to field most basic calls. They should answer all calls related to basic program functionality and system availability. They should know how to bold and underline, change email settings and know whether or not the web server is having problems. This requires cooperation from other groups, and I think everyone is willing to help IF there is a legitimate attempt at improvement."
The helpdesk should have a rapport with technical services and developers. The helpdesk staff shouldn't need to know detailed information, but enough to pass along to workers. Senior helpdesk staff should be trained in the more advanced applications (including the in-house and production apps!) so that they can act as level 2 support.
You'll also need to work up something (training or a script) to extract information from end-users. Many users don't understand the difference between their computer hardware, OS, application, network and server. When something breaks, users may incorrectly diagnose the problem.
"Poor Follow Up - In my experience, follow up is crucial in determining effectives of any service. I think they should implement some sort of follow up procedure to track overall effectiveness and user satisfaction."
Get some kind of tracking system, so problems can be entered, categorized, and used for training future helpdesk hires. Review the problems for the previous week/month, and see what can be done to improve productivity. If you find many of the calls are about basic Word or Excel functionality (for example), hiring a teacher for a one-day group class may be cheaper than interrupting a developer or having the person wait for helpdesk support.
"Also, given the availability of cd-burners, p2p sharing, and large percentage of the fact that teenagers are a significant % of the market, it's not unreasonable to conclude that more teenagers are illegally copying music than in the past."
When I was in high school (late 80's), portable bookshelf stereos (aka "boom boxes") were popular. At the time, many of these stereos had dual cassette decks (for copying, of course!), or CD players that would record directly to cassette. Quite often the CD players would be synchronized with the cassettes, to start playing when record was hit, or (in the 90's) calculate the number of songs per tape.
My point: illegal high-quality copying has been easy for over 15 years. Yet despite copying (to cassette) becoming easier and more automated, sales have been unaffected until recently. Now that the recording industry's nemesis, Napster, is dead, they've found more targets. There are a number of reasons why CD sales are down that don't involve music quality _or_ copying: the price of CDs has risen, the economy is doing poorly, "crippled" CDs are being sold, people aren't "upgrading" from cassette anymore, radio stations are being consolidated, etc.
The bottom line is that the recording industry is acting like they can do no wrong. If things don't change -- the economy picks up, CD prices fall substantially, etc -- the industry is in for a rude awakening.
IIRC, there already is (well, was) a C-variant called "E". It had most of the features of C++, with one change: persistent variables. I can't recall the specific method for declaring the variables to be persistent, or the mechanisms for storing the data.
Anyway, this was about 10 years ago, and my memory isn't what it used to be.
Now, whether the CEO's yearly contribution to the company is actually worth 20 times the average employees', is of course, debatable.
Having been at two companies with awful leadership, a good CEO can make all the difference in the world.
One CEO (IMHO) ruined a major company by ignoring what the marketplace wanted, while another micromanaged the operating expenses to the point where there weren't enough licenses for everyone to log in simultaneously.
If you want more anecdotal evidence, look at Apple before Steve Jobs' return, and after.
Some CEOs are overcompensated (IMHO), but if the companies are doing well, isn't that an indicator that the CEO is on-the-ball?
Amazingly, this new breed of CDRW Drives can burn a complete 700MB CD in about 2.5 minutes!"
My trusty 16x CDRW can burn a 700 MB CDR in about 5 minutes, and faster burners give slightly better performance. (For the uninitiated, faster burners (24x and higher) write most of the CDR slower than their "maximum" speed.) This CDRW is probably only running at 52x for a minor portion of the burn.
OTOH, the CDRW speeds are starting to ramp up nicely. I like using CDRWs to back up files, but even at 10x it can take a while to burn a full disk. For many CDRW enthusiasts, the big story isn't the "quantum leap" from 48x to 52x, its the CDRW speeds.
Personally, I think this is a good method to go back to. Make the author renew their copyright every 14 years (and make the fees associated with it increase geometrically each time). If the author doesn't generate enough in sales to pay the fee, then it's time to use it as source material for other authors.
While I like the idea of renewable copyrights (up to a certain maximum), and dislike the idea of automatic copyrights, the sliding scale just won't work. Some authors will be able to pay hundreds, maybe even a few thousand dollars to maintain copyright. On the other hand, large companies can throw away $50,000 and not even miss it -- and I'm not even talking about behemoths like Disney and Microsoft that could easily afford tens of millions per year on copyright "updates".
Once the "less successful" authors/companies let their copyrights go, big companies will be able to cherry pick from the public domain.
Gateway's plan could have use to smaller businesses. Assuming that you pay for the entire computer day, that's $3.60 per PC.
Look at the economics of the situation: "renting" 200 computers (averaging 2.0 Ghz) for a day is going to be $720... The cost of buying the equivalent number of Microtels from Walmart.com is (assuming 800 Mhz Duons have half the CPU performance), 400 machines at 300 dollars == $120,000. Plus electricity, networking, etc.
What's going to be Problem #1 is who Gateway sells this to. Large companies and enterprises will already have an extensive network of PCs. That pretty much leaves small and medium sized companies that need a lot of processing power in a very short time, with the loss of one or more pieces not effecting the whole. (The only "common" app that I can think of customers would be computer-generated animation... but I need more caffeine:)
Problem #2 is setup, software, and licensing. I don't think Gateway is going to flick a switch at 9:00 PM and have their WinXP computers start running BSD, Linux, etc. On top of that, what will the set-up cost be? Will companies be paying $20/hour per tech to install the software, or is it remote installation with a flat fee? But the killer will be licenses... unless the company is using free or homebrew applications, will they have to pay for each computer in the cluster?
It could work for Gateway. If they give free upgrades when new machines come in, and performance guarantees (if a PC isn't performing at 100%), it might catch on. But like another poster said, CPU cycles are fairly cheap, but bandwidth is expensive.
There's no market for snuff films. The porn industry has been prosecuted, pushed around, and harassed in every way imaginable -- but it's still around. People are willing to pay for it, and go out of their way to get it.
If a big studio thought there was money in snuff films, they would tap a favorite congressman to bend the laws to their convenience.
I understand what he's saying in terms of the commercial skipping, but I have personal issue with paying for cable (or satellite) service, then paying again for the privilege of skipping commercials.
If I have to pay my own cable bill and buy my equipment, shouldn't the advertisers be compensating the viewers directly? It'll never happen, but it's an interesting thought.:)
If commercials "went away", there's still plenty of ways to advertise. Subsidize TV shows for product placement, or have a commercial "bug" in the corner of the screen. Gary's view is that he has a very good business model, and that anyone who doesn't put cash directly in his pockets is unethical at best, criminal at worst.
Sarcasm on. Moderate accordingly. Gary Lauder writes: PVR functionality should be provisioned from the headend for the following reasons (which ultimately will benefit consumers): * Disk noise wakes my wife
That is your wife's problem, not the industry's. I've been in the same room as a Tivo, and never noticed any significant noise. If I were to say that cable TV prices keep me awake, is that grounds to have my bill reduced?
* Replay box hot enough to fry an egg -- Is that a feature?
I've never seen a Replay box... but I have seen a little thing called a TV. It gets pretty warm too!
* Disk size limitations mean obsolescence, esp. with HDTV
HDTV is making existing VCRs and TVs obsolete. Should we get rid of the whole "TV" concept?
My basic thesis is that PVRs + Satellite will eat cable's lunch, and since it's unambiguous that cable needs to get the copyright clearances to offer programming from the head-end, they should start now.
Translation: I'm a venture capitalist who didn't get into the PVR business when I could. Since PVRs are better than cable, let's ban them so I can make money! [All IMHO, of course.]
I suggested that consumers pay 1 cent per commercial skipped (which is about the same as what advertisers pay). That would be equivalent to $10/thousand commercials skipped.
That's a reasonable solution -- assuming that the TV, cable or satellite feeds, and other equipment are free. If I'm paying for cable, I should be able to handle the incoming data in any way I see fit, as long as I stay within Fair Use of copyright.
Slashdot Mirror
"I bought all the 3rd ed books already after all... it seems stingy to charge users twice."
And if you want to be "current", you're going to have to buy all the 3E books again. WotC is releasing what they call 3.5E -- updates to the three core rulebooks (PHB, DMG, and MM). Going forward, only the 3.5E system will be supported.
There is no trade-in or rebate offer for owners of the previous edition. So you're going to have to pay for 3E "twice" either way.
In this case, Digital Restrictions Management means that documents won't be available to other systems. If you get an email (or Word document), it'll either be encrypted and only usable on the computer it was sent to, or the software won't allow it to be transferred to an unverified system.
Cut and paste can be disable for "secure" documents/emails. The window showing "secure" documents could just be excluded from screenshots. Considering that Microsoft controls the OS, office software, and has influence on hardware manufacturers, they can implement any level of "features".
Without cracking open a secured computer, probably the only ways to bypass the security would be sniffing network packets (easily defeated) or using a camera to photograph the screen.
The first problem with the benchmarks is that all of the systems had 512 MB of RAM. While that's the best way to gauge raw CPU power, the problem is that very few systems had anything near that level of power. IIRC, I spent somewhere between $50 and $100 USD back in 1998 for 64 megs -- outfitting a PC with 512 megs would have been prohibitively expensive. While it's nice to look at the benchmarks as a "best case" scenario, older CPUs would have performed much worse due to swapping.
Also, while the Pentium II is mentioned in Intel's history, it's not in the benchmarks. The Celeron used the same core, but with a differnt L2 cache setup (2nd generation Celerons had 128 KB at full CPU speed, while the P2 had 512 KB at half CPU speed).
"There will still be the vast majority who DO NOT UPGRADE and use THE OLD STANDARD. "
This is true -- according to Google's Zeitgeist, the number of people using "obsolete" versions of Windows (95, 98, NT) is almost the same as those using the latest versions (2000 and XP).
"I really can't see how this will effect people who don't use it (now tell me how it will take over the world when people do start to use it and how it will effect the data on the internet and bla bla bal....)"
Easy. If broadband ISPs only allow Palladium-equipped devices (PCs, routers, etc) online, then the Internet will be denied to everyone else. Should Microsoft make their own version of IPv6 that's "secure", it's going to be supported by all the major players. (If the MS-IPv6 protocol can't be altered through software, then any company that doesn't support the corrupted protocol is going to be locked out from all new PCs once IPv6 goes live.)
Even easier: sites that currently "require" Internet Explorer -- but work fine with other browsers -- will require IE plus Palladium. Or your ISP says that only PCs with Palladium are supported.
If Microsoft plays their hand correctly, they'll be in complete control of the x86 platform, and nothing other than a successful anti-trust case will break that hold. If Microsoft fails, they'll alienate enough people that Linux and other OS's will make significant gains.
There's a lot of reasons Linux/OSS users don't use Microsoft:
Even if those issues were addressed, it doesn't change the fact that Microsoft's history has been one of "extend and embrace". Regardless of how good their Linux products would/could be, it would be difficult to accept them unless Microsoft changes as a company.
Assuming my (rusty) French is correct, GETax software isn't offered specifically for Linux, but there's a PDF version that's usable with Mandrake (and other distros with XPDF).
All three versions of OpenOffice and Mozilla will fit on one CD-R.
Why would I try to overpopulate yet another medium to tell mom and dad I'm OK while there are emergency sevices that might have used the bandwidth to communicate something more meaningful? If I'm OK, I will be OK ...
;) don't begrudge families the ability (or desire) to stay in touch.
You make a lot of assumptions in your statement.
First, no personal emergency communications should ever go on an emergency or restricted band. While I'm not a radio expert, most of the fire department radios I've seen can't make major changes in frequency like the radios on Star Trek do. It's unlikely that using CB or HAM radio is going to make things difficult for the authorities.
Second, you're assuming the situation is static -- people are either OK, or they're not. In the case of natural disasters (flood, tornado, hurricane), someone may assume they're alright, but the situation could change in hours (or minutes in the case of tornado). That backup communications system may be the only way to call for help.
Third, the communications you provide may be important for the people "down the line". Spreading word about the effected areas may help other people avoid clogged roads, or know that loved ones in other areas are alright.
Fourth, many humans are social creatures with responsibilities beyond themselves. Worrying about a loved one is nearly as bad as hearing that they died. If the person is a victim -- either injured or a fatality -- there will be numerous arrangements to be made. Just because you live in your parents basement
"The question they fail to ask, though, is: why do people waste part of their eight hour day?"
Some services (especially banks and physicians) are only available for a small part of the day. There may be some overlap, but what can you do when a customer-service line or bank closes at 4:00PM and you don't get out of work until 5:30PM?
Slowdowns during the day aren't uncommon. As someone else said, when you're waiting for a program to compile, it's an opportunity to look at the Internet or personal email. There can be a brief lull between meetings, waiting for coworkers, etc.
do we still need the traditional eight-hour work day?
Try collaborating with a group in a different timezone -- preferably overseas. When you only have an hour or two when everyone is "in the office", organization and communication becomes difficult and slow. The same thing would happen if everyone picked their own hours and days.
I honestly don't think that sharing broadband is the primary motivation for most people. Sharing a single computer for Internet access is acceptable until you get used to every computer in the house being networked. And I've seen some SOHO routers that had a serial port for connecting to an external modem.
I think broadband's big advantages for the non-technical user is convenience and (relative) value. Having an always-on connection is much nicer than waiting for a modem to dial (and possibly redial)... and the phone line isn't "in use" with broadband. Also, paying $40-$100 a month for broadband is easy to justify based on speed; while it may not be 30 times faster, you can do more with broadband simultaneously than you can with dialup.
Being able to toss a router between my LAN and cable modem is a major benefit to having broadband, but I doubt that the average would be capable of doing it without help.
The utility company is owned by the city, so the money consumers spend stays in the town. The city has "made" $32 million that would otherwise have gone to the cable companies and/or ISPs.
;)
Try reading the article.
I would think that damage would be worse if the worm just sat quietly for a few weeks (or even months), slowly corrupting data in the database. At that point, backups may not be usable; at some point either the last backup media has been recycled, or new entries to the database would be too expensive to re-enter.
A "stealth" worm, whose primary focus is remaining undetected rather than consuming huge amounts of resources would be a lot more devastating than an obvious one.
I'd advise against having a bootable distro. While it seems like a good idea now, in a few years the distro will be dated may not be able to support the latest hardware. (Of course, that assumes the CD-Rs actually last that long:) And who will do the troubleshooting if if fails to boot properly on Uncle Fred's PC?
Also, people will have their own software for viewing pictures and movies. Why force a slideshow on someone who'd rather view the pics in Photoshop, MS Photo Editor or Gimp?
"This is one example of how our society is breeding the destruction of mother earth."
The problem IMHO isn't that the chips use a lot of resources to create, it's that they're disposable and lose their value in a few years. I wouldn't be bothered so much if this level of resources was spent on a durable good, but within 5-10 years (being optimistic) most of these chips will be trashed. A house requires a lot more resources to build, but can last decades (or hundreds of years) if well-constructed.
How many people (and companies) have sticks of RAM that they can't use, either because all of their motherboard's slots are full, or because it can't be used in the latest and greatest computers?
"Aren't there other means for chip production? "
I'm sure there are -- if you want to pay significantly more.
"As for a tracking system, the last company I worked for (in IT) used Vantive as their helpdesk system."
:)
I'm too far removed from my helpdesk days -- working in one, or closely with one -- to remember any of the specific software that was used, but just about anything that stores the data and allows it to be summarized is better than nothing.
At one point, I even wrote a quick and dirty app for the other developers in my department to use. Nothing formal, but it tracked time spent, severity, and contact information. All the info we needed to give to managers for changes to happen.
"Credibility - Until the users see them as useful, they aren't. Once there is some confidence that they are competent and helpful, users will stop bypassing them and developers will stop letting users bypass them."
Apply serious penalties for anyone who bypasses the system. Management has to be on board for it to work, but if the sales department keeps using developers for low-level support, either charge them for the time or alter the deadlines. It sounds unreasonable, but that's the only way to make changes stick.
Have the developers track their work, including "helpdesk" duties. Once you can show that how their time is being (ab)used, it's easier to get management interested. (I was in a similar situation, and once my manager saw that 30-50% of my time was spent doing helpdesk work instead of coding, things started to change.)
One thing to remember is that developers will always be in the support loop. They may not be Level-1 support, but serious or techinically-involved problems are best solved by the developers.
"Poor Processes - The help desk is supposed to be able to field most basic calls. They should answer all calls related to basic program functionality and system availability. They should know how to bold and underline, change email settings and know whether or not the web server is having problems. This requires cooperation from other groups, and I think everyone is willing to help IF there is a legitimate attempt at improvement."
The helpdesk should have a rapport with technical services and developers. The helpdesk staff shouldn't need to know detailed information, but enough to pass along to workers. Senior helpdesk staff should be trained in the more advanced applications (including the in-house and production apps!) so that they can act as level 2 support.
You'll also need to work up something (training or a script) to extract information from end-users. Many users don't understand the difference between their computer hardware, OS, application, network and server. When something breaks, users may incorrectly diagnose the problem.
"Poor Follow Up - In my experience, follow up is crucial in determining effectives of any service. I think they should implement some sort of follow up procedure to track overall effectiveness and user satisfaction."
Get some kind of tracking system, so problems can be entered, categorized, and used for training future helpdesk hires. Review the problems for the previous week/month, and see what can be done to improve productivity. If you find many of the calls are about basic Word or Excel functionality (for example), hiring a teacher for a one-day group class may be cheaper than interrupting a developer or having the person wait for helpdesk support.
"Also, given the availability of cd-burners, p2p sharing, and large percentage of the fact that teenagers are a significant % of the market, it's not unreasonable to conclude that more teenagers are illegally copying music than in the past."
When I was in high school (late 80's), portable bookshelf stereos (aka "boom boxes") were popular. At the time, many of these stereos had dual cassette decks (for copying, of course!), or CD players that would record directly to cassette. Quite often the CD players would be synchronized with the cassettes, to start playing when record was hit, or (in the 90's) calculate the number of songs per tape.
My point: illegal high-quality copying has been easy for over 15 years. Yet despite copying (to cassette) becoming easier and more automated, sales have been unaffected until recently. Now that the recording industry's nemesis, Napster, is dead, they've found more targets. There are a number of reasons why CD sales are down that don't involve music quality _or_ copying: the price of CDs has risen, the economy is doing poorly, "crippled" CDs are being sold, people aren't "upgrading" from cassette anymore, radio stations are being consolidated, etc.
The bottom line is that the recording industry is acting like they can do no wrong. If things don't change -- the economy picks up, CD prices fall substantially, etc -- the industry is in for a rude awakening.
IIRC, there already is (well, was) a C-variant called "E". It had most of the features of C++, with one change: persistent variables. I can't recall the specific method for declaring the variables to be persistent, or the mechanisms for storing the data.
Anyway, this was about 10 years ago, and my memory isn't what it used to be.
Now, whether the CEO's yearly contribution to the company is actually worth 20 times the average employees', is of course, debatable.
Having been at two companies with awful leadership, a good CEO can make all the difference in the world.
One CEO (IMHO) ruined a major company by ignoring what the marketplace wanted, while another micromanaged the operating expenses to the point where there weren't enough licenses for everyone to log in simultaneously.
If you want more anecdotal evidence, look at Apple before Steve Jobs' return, and after.
Some CEOs are overcompensated (IMHO), but if the companies are doing well, isn't that an indicator that the CEO is on-the-ball?
Amazingly, this new breed of CDRW Drives can burn a complete 700MB CD in about 2.5 minutes!"
My trusty 16x CDRW can burn a 700 MB CDR in about 5 minutes, and faster burners give slightly better performance. (For the uninitiated, faster burners (24x and higher) write most of the CDR slower than their "maximum" speed.) This CDRW is probably only running at 52x for a minor portion of the burn.
OTOH, the CDRW speeds are starting to ramp up nicely. I like using CDRWs to back up files, but even at 10x it can take a while to burn a full disk. For many CDRW enthusiasts, the big story isn't the "quantum leap" from 48x to 52x, its the CDRW speeds.
Personally, I think this is a good method to go back to. Make the author renew their copyright every 14 years (and make the fees associated with it increase geometrically each time). If the author doesn't generate enough in sales to pay the fee, then it's time to use it as source material for other authors.
While I like the idea of renewable copyrights (up to a certain maximum), and dislike the idea of automatic copyrights, the sliding scale just won't work. Some authors will be able to pay hundreds, maybe even a few thousand dollars to maintain copyright. On the other hand, large companies can throw away $50,000 and not even miss it -- and I'm not even talking about behemoths like Disney and Microsoft that could easily afford tens of millions per year on copyright "updates".
Once the "less successful" authors/companies let their copyrights go, big companies will be able to cherry pick from the public domain.
Gateway's plan could have use to smaller businesses. Assuming that you pay for the entire computer day, that's $3.60 per PC.
:)
Look at the economics of the situation: "renting" 200 computers (averaging 2.0 Ghz) for a day is going to be $720... The cost of buying the equivalent number of Microtels from Walmart.com is (assuming 800 Mhz Duons have half the CPU performance), 400 machines at 300 dollars == $120,000. Plus electricity, networking, etc.
What's going to be Problem #1 is who Gateway sells this to. Large companies and enterprises will already have an extensive network of PCs. That pretty much leaves small and medium sized companies that need a lot of processing power in a very short time, with the loss of one or more pieces not effecting the whole. (The only "common" app that I can think of customers would be computer-generated animation... but I need more caffeine
Problem #2 is setup, software, and licensing. I don't think Gateway is going to flick a switch at 9:00 PM and have their WinXP computers start running BSD, Linux, etc. On top of that, what will the set-up cost be? Will companies be paying $20/hour per tech to install the software, or is it remote installation with a flat fee? But the killer will be licenses... unless the company is using free or homebrew applications, will they have to pay for each computer in the cluster?
It could work for Gateway. If they give free upgrades when new machines come in, and performance guarantees (if a PC isn't performing at 100%), it might catch on. But like another poster said, CPU cycles are fairly cheap, but bandwidth is expensive.
There's no market for snuff films. The porn industry has been prosecuted, pushed around, and harassed in every way imaginable -- but it's still around. People are willing to pay for it, and go out of their way to get it.
If a big studio thought there was money in snuff films, they would tap a favorite congressman to bend the laws to their convenience.
I understand what he's saying in terms of the commercial skipping, but I have personal issue with paying for cable (or satellite) service, then paying again for the privilege of skipping commercials.
:)
If I have to pay my own cable bill and buy my equipment, shouldn't the advertisers be compensating the viewers directly? It'll never happen, but it's an interesting thought.
If commercials "went away", there's still plenty of ways to advertise. Subsidize TV shows for product placement, or have a commercial "bug" in the corner of the screen. Gary's view is that he has a very good business model, and that anyone who doesn't put cash directly in his pockets is unethical at best, criminal at worst.
I kinda doubt they are going to execute him. I don't even think the MPAA would encourage that.
Not unless they could get the movie rights for cheap!
(Yes, I'm joking.)
Sarcasm on. Moderate accordingly.
Gary Lauder writes: PVR functionality should be provisioned from the headend for the following reasons (which ultimately will benefit consumers):
* Disk noise wakes my wife
That is your wife's problem, not the industry's. I've been in the same room as a Tivo, and never noticed any significant noise. If I were to say that cable TV prices keep me awake, is that grounds to have my bill reduced?
* Replay box hot enough to fry an egg -- Is that a feature?
I've never seen a Replay box... but I have seen a little thing called a TV. It gets pretty warm too!
* Disk size limitations mean obsolescence, esp. with HDTV
HDTV is making existing VCRs and TVs obsolete. Should we get rid of the whole "TV" concept?
My basic thesis is that PVRs + Satellite will eat cable's lunch, and since it's unambiguous that cable needs to get the copyright clearances to offer programming from the head-end, they should start now.
Translation: I'm a venture capitalist who didn't get into the PVR business when I could. Since PVRs are better than cable, let's ban them so I can make money! [All IMHO, of course.]
I suggested that consumers pay 1 cent per commercial skipped (which is about the same as what advertisers pay). That would be equivalent to $10/thousand commercials skipped.
That's a reasonable solution -- assuming that the TV, cable or satellite feeds, and other equipment are free. If I'm paying for cable, I should be able to handle the incoming data in any way I see fit, as long as I stay within Fair Use of copyright.
Sarcasm off.