Why is Iran's technological advancements systematically tagged as a danger to the rest of the world?
> if there were a bomb that could be placed on the end of this missile, it would in breach of Iran's obligations under the non-proliferation treaty
Sir Richard Dalton's declaration is nothing more than propaganda. Basically he is saying that IF those rockets were armed with nuclear heads, then it would be a breach of the non-proliferation treaty. So Iran's space program is in nothing a breach to any treaty. Then why would it be tagged as dangerous to us western countries?
Well, of memory I can give you 2 examples that come to mind:
1- In outlook XP the list of folders (Inbox, etc.) was replaced by huge buttons that eat up all the space on the left. Space is expensive.
2- In outlook XP, to get to the list of your email accounts you had to go through 1 more step than in 2000. Email accounts management is still a mess in Outlook 2003.
3- Adding passwords to files in Word and Excel XP was cumbersome compared to 2000.
The step from Outlook XP to 2003 was even worse with a terrible interface. The good side is that whether in XP or 2003, I was able to configure the interface to be 2000-like.
The reason Office 2007 is selling better than Office XP at the time is that Office XP was a step back in terms of usability compared to Office 2000. Office XP is too cluttered and un-intuitive. Now people are hanging to anything offering a different alternative to Office XP.
I don't see where this is a threat to VoIP? If I receive an email or a call telling me there is a problem with my bank account, my reaction would be to talk to my bank counselor. I don't know how it is in the US but here in France, each customer has a personal bank counselor to interact with. And I would certainly never give any information to a voice machine. Ultimately, the problem has never been the technology but people's ingenuousness. If somone asks you to give the secret passcode to your account (you know, the one the bank told you never to give to anyone) would you do it? Of course not! So I really don't think that this could be a threat to VoIP or email, or what else. The ones being tricked by Phishers are people.
I agree on the fact that this article is full of buzz and sums up to "ASP is ripe for adoption". This guy has no clue about what he is talking about. I am not an employee of salesforce.com but I work for a company that is currently deploying it for a large base. We have started this project 8 months ago and there only was one outage of 1 hour during that period of time. So I don't know what is with all this outage stuff people are talking about (we constantly monitor the website). I have done software engineering prior to this project and each model (ASP vs. develop vs. traditional client/server software) has its own advantages. But with my experience with salesforce.com, I think the ASP model is sound and allows a company to:
1- deploy for any number of people in no time : no waiting time for seeing version 1.0 or for deploying the software on n machines.
2- Deploy at no cost: you only need a browser.
3- have regular updates (short release cycles) : salesforce has a new release every 6 months (vs. usually at least every year for traditional software)
4- be part of the development cycle : companies have a feature request process in which their requests are integrated in the devlopments. They influence the direction the application takes. The downside to this is maybe company A with 10 users will have less influence than company B with 1000 users.
One last point is the way you can develop parts of the application: everything is done visually, i.e. if you want to create a new field you just drag and drop it on the page layout and everything gets automatically created (updates everything from the page to the database). This takes a few minutes vs. half a day when I used to be a developer... I wished some IDEs were so easy to use.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is Iran's technological advancements systematically tagged as a danger to the rest of the world?
> if there were a bomb that could be placed on the end of this missile, it would in breach of Iran's obligations under the non-proliferation treaty
Sir Richard Dalton's declaration is nothing more than propaganda. Basically he is saying that IF those rockets were armed with nuclear heads, then it would be a breach of the non-proliferation treaty. So Iran's space program is in nothing a breach to any treaty. Then why would it be tagged as dangerous to us western countries?
Well, of memory I can give you 2 examples that come to mind: 1- In outlook XP the list of folders (Inbox, etc.) was replaced by huge buttons that eat up all the space on the left. Space is expensive. 2- In outlook XP, to get to the list of your email accounts you had to go through 1 more step than in 2000. Email accounts management is still a mess in Outlook 2003. 3- Adding passwords to files in Word and Excel XP was cumbersome compared to 2000. The step from Outlook XP to 2003 was even worse with a terrible interface. The good side is that whether in XP or 2003, I was able to configure the interface to be 2000-like.
The reason Office 2007 is selling better than Office XP at the time is that Office XP was a step back in terms of usability compared to Office 2000. Office XP is too cluttered and un-intuitive. Now people are hanging to anything offering a different alternative to Office XP.
I don't see where this is a threat to VoIP? If I receive an email or a call telling me there is a problem with my bank account, my reaction would be to talk to my bank counselor. I don't know how it is in the US but here in France, each customer has a personal bank counselor to interact with. And I would certainly never give any information to a voice machine. Ultimately, the problem has never been the technology but people's ingenuousness. If somone asks you to give the secret passcode to your account (you know, the one the bank told you never to give to anyone) would you do it? Of course not!
So I really don't think that this could be a threat to VoIP or email, or what else. The ones being tricked by Phishers are people.
I agree on the fact that this article is full of buzz and sums up to "ASP is ripe for adoption". This guy has no clue about what he is talking about. I am not an employee of salesforce.com but I work for a company that is currently deploying it for a large base. We have started this project 8 months ago and there only was one outage of 1 hour during that period of time. So I don't know what is with all this outage stuff people are talking about (we constantly monitor the website). I have done software engineering prior to this project and each model (ASP vs. develop vs. traditional client/server software) has its own advantages. But with my experience with salesforce.com, I think the ASP model is sound and allows a company to: 1- deploy for any number of people in no time : no waiting time for seeing version 1.0 or for deploying the software on n machines. 2- Deploy at no cost: you only need a browser. 3- have regular updates (short release cycles) : salesforce has a new release every 6 months (vs. usually at least every year for traditional software) 4- be part of the development cycle : companies have a feature request process in which their requests are integrated in the devlopments. They influence the direction the application takes. The downside to this is maybe company A with 10 users will have less influence than company B with 1000 users. One last point is the way you can develop parts of the application: everything is done visually, i.e. if you want to create a new field you just drag and drop it on the page layout and everything gets automatically created (updates everything from the page to the database). This takes a few minutes vs. half a day when I used to be a developer... I wished some IDEs were so easy to use.