...that someone who goes into a field like CS at a later stage is likely to be more committed to the subject, and also understands the value of quality, personal development and education.
All attributes that make an excellent asset to a software company. I always think that someone who is at least moderately talented and yet committed to achieving the highest standard, is the ideal software developer.
Not to say that a young graduate doesn't have these attributes, but there are lot who don't.
How do you know that guidance system on the shuttle wasn't sabotaged in an obscure plot for world domination that was narrowly averted by this bat flying in at the last minute and guiding the shuttle into orbit only to return quickly to the offices of the Daily Bat and resume his secret identity has Gerald the Bat, mild mannered reporter.
You can be an idiot and be irreplaceable - and of lot of these guys are.
One clown I came across deleted all the test code, because he thought testing was a waste of time. He was gone a good 8 months when that shit hit the inevitable fan.
The problem is that they write shit hot amazing code that does the job and impresses the PHBs, but if it is unmaintainable by a team then: (a) It's not scalable (in terms of growing the product) (b) It's long-term useless
This is the equivalent of a teenager thinking they are super drivers because they can speed at 130mph with their eyes closed. An experienced driver knows that deer can jump into the road.
Excellent demonstration of the point I was making.
Microsoft's problem here is not about what information they wish to present, but how they present it. One option is to use your intellect and marketing skills (that Microsoft has an abundance of) and present information in a way that shows your case in a good light. The same information is presented, but it is received in a much more positive way - and the message is communicated effectively, which is the real underlying goal.
Alternatively, you can demonstrate your poor marketing skills and weak intellect with a comment like:
fuck off you idiot. So i guess it is useless for anyone to ever report any benchmarks according to your moronic theory.
This is a stupid thing for Microsoft to do, because:
(a) if an independent source verifies the test, then nothing will be reported (because there is nothing to report) (b) if an independent source refutes the test, then Microsoft are liars. (c) if no independent source tests the test, then no one will believe Microsoft, except those that want justify their existing use of IE.
The smart thing to do would have been to get a completely independent and respected source to run the original test - or to destroy the reputations of IE6 and IE7 by comparing them with a vastly improved IE8 (which would have been trusted results from Microsoft).
ave you ever looked into coding an extension for FF? It's horrid horrid stuff And it's better than any other browser.
No actually, it's not. It's more flexible, but it's not "better" by any means. XUL is a piece of trash.
Then why are you using it?
I'm not being trite. I would take your point if you said that Firefox was the best but it has flaws, or if for some reason you were committed to using Firefox - then complaining about those flaws makes sense, but if there is a better browser, then use it.
You're like the lad complaining that his head hurts when he hits it with a hammer... don't hit it with the hammer.
Explicitly no. But I can name at least 5 websites that I use on a regular basis that still has "You require Internet Explorer 6 or higher on a Windows PC" - to view a web page! That is a de-facto standard.
iPhone is pretty dominant
I have never heard of someone borrowing a phone and saying "Sony Ericsson, is that an iPhone or an iTouch?" The very mention of two competing products (iPhone and Android) implies that there isn't market dominance (and in fact there a many others). There might be services on my phone that are not available because I don't own an iPhone, but it can do everything it was designed to do without restriction.
But this really is a damn stupid argument to be making.
Are you suggesting that it is a "stupid argument" to think that the EU would enforce their own competition law? Because I'm not saying anything else. And it's not the EU going after Microsoft, it is Opera complaining to the EU and then the EU acting on that complaint. If Microsoft complained to the EU, they would also be entitled to its protection.
The problem is that IE is just good enough that the vast majority of people don't care enough to bother replacing it.
IE is a major security risk - certainly IE6. Yet a large number of corporations, who are required to care, not only use it - but do so to the exclusion of all others. That suggests that big business looks after big business - and that's a no no.
No, but if a piece of software is market dominant and there are mainstream alternatives that are far superior in all respects, then you must ask whether this is due simply to superior marketing or is there illegal manipulation of the market going on through abuse of a dominant position.
And that question is perfectly within the EU's remit to ask.
It must be noted, however, that IRMA is fighting to protect the meagre incomes of people like U2 and Enya - who are all just managing to survive with one castle each.
Sarcasm aside, due to the fact that musicians have a tax exemption (cos lord knows U2 need it) - there are unfortunately a lot of them here, and they also have great wadges of cash. This in turn makes IRMA far more powerful than it should be.
I still don't think the other ISPs are just going to rollover - Eircom is a joke. They are largest because they were originally a monopoly - and there is a large number of users that are slow to change.
Slashdot Mirror
...and you're the fool to carry it on.
...is that some of the real stories are less plausible.
...or will it?
...that someone who goes into a field like CS at a later stage is likely to be more committed to the subject, and also understands the value of quality, personal development and education.
All attributes that make an excellent asset to a software company. I always think that someone who is at least moderately talented and yet committed to achieving the highest standard, is the ideal software developer.
Not to say that a young graduate doesn't have these attributes, but there are lot who don't.
It's possibly a tough route, but domain knowledge is as important, if not more, than technical skill.
You don't say what your current area is but is there an opportunity to stay in the same field, but in an IT role?
How do you know that guidance system on the shuttle wasn't sabotaged in an obscure plot for world domination that was narrowly averted by this bat flying in at the last minute and guiding the shuttle into orbit only to return quickly to the offices of the Daily Bat and resume his secret identity has Gerald the Bat, mild mannered reporter.
Kevin?
(Could be a clash of cultures thing though)
I run VMWare on Linux! http://xkcd.com/350/
You can be an idiot and be irreplaceable - and of lot of these guys are.
One clown I came across deleted all the test code, because he thought testing was a waste of time. He was gone a good 8 months when that shit hit the inevitable fan.
The problem is that they write shit hot amazing code that does the job and impresses the PHBs, but if it is unmaintainable by a team then:
(a) It's not scalable (in terms of growing the product)
(b) It's long-term useless
This is the equivalent of a teenager thinking they are super drivers because they can speed at 130mph with their eyes closed. An experienced driver knows that deer can jump into the road.
Excellent demonstration of the point I was making.
Microsoft's problem here is not about what information they wish to present, but how they present it. One option is to use your intellect and marketing skills (that Microsoft has an abundance of) and present information in a way that shows your case in a good light. The same information is presented, but it is received in a much more positive way - and the message is communicated effectively, which is the real underlying goal.
Alternatively, you can demonstrate your poor marketing skills and weak intellect with a comment like:
fuck off you idiot. So i guess it is useless for anyone to ever report any benchmarks according to your moronic theory.
That was the coolest video I have ever seen on YouTube. I've already watched it 5 times.
Brilliant - made my day.
This is a stupid thing for Microsoft to do, because:
(a) if an independent source verifies the test, then nothing will be reported (because there is nothing to report)
(b) if an independent source refutes the test, then Microsoft are liars.
(c) if no independent source tests the test, then no one will believe Microsoft, except those that want justify their existing use of IE.
The smart thing to do would have been to get a completely independent and respected source to run the original test - or to destroy the reputations of IE6 and IE7 by comparing them with a vastly improved IE8 (which would have been trusted results from Microsoft).
Neither are you.
Illinois redefines "retarded" to mean "most smartiest place in the world."
ave you ever looked into coding an extension for FF? It's horrid horrid stuff
And it's better than any other browser.
No actually, it's not. It's more flexible, but it's not "better" by any means. XUL is a piece of trash.
Then why are you using it?
I'm not being trite. I would take your point if you said that Firefox was the best but it has flaws, or if for some reason you were committed to using Firefox - then complaining about those flaws makes sense, but if there is a better browser, then use it.
You're like the lad complaining that his head hurts when he hits it with a hammer... don't hit it with the hammer.
Bollox we do. Some bastard stole them.
I hate being on the Dark Side.
I think these chaps must not be just British, but in fact English.
Because if they were Welsh they'd fly to the Bahamas, get sunburned, fly back and report "Saw lots of ice. Very cold, very white."
And if they were Scottish they wouldn't bother because they'd just go to Aberdeen, where it's proper cold.
My car has an ESP button. I've never pressed it - but I do hope it stands for "Ejection Seat - Passenger".
I don't see MS imposing many standards
Explicitly no. But I can name at least 5 websites that I use on a regular basis that still has "You require Internet Explorer 6 or higher on a Windows PC" - to view a web page! That is a de-facto standard.
iPhone is pretty dominant
I have never heard of someone borrowing a phone and saying "Sony Ericsson, is that an iPhone or an iTouch?" The very mention of two competing products (iPhone and Android) implies that there isn't market dominance (and in fact there a many others). There might be services on my phone that are not available because I don't own an iPhone, but it can do everything it was designed to do without restriction.
Is the iPhone or Android market dominant? Are Apple or Google able to impose their de-facto standards on anyone else?
But this really is a damn stupid argument to be making.
Are you suggesting that it is a "stupid argument" to think that the EU would enforce their own competition law? Because I'm not saying anything else. And it's not the EU going after Microsoft, it is Opera complaining to the EU and then the EU acting on that complaint. If Microsoft complained to the EU, they would also be entitled to its protection.
The problem is that IE is just good enough that the vast majority of people don't care enough to bother replacing it.
IE is a major security risk - certainly IE6. Yet a large number of corporations, who are required to care, not only use it - but do so to the exclusion of all others. That suggests that big business looks after big business - and that's a no no.
So shitty software should be illegal?
No, but if a piece of software is market dominant and there are mainstream alternatives that are far superior in all respects, then you must ask whether this is due simply to superior marketing or is there illegal manipulation of the market going on through abuse of a dominant position.
And that question is perfectly within the EU's remit to ask.
Depends on which single band member we're talking about.
You know who I mean: starts with B, ends with Oh No! and rhymes with shutthefuckupbonoyouselfabsorbedgit.
And for tracking Vista sales
You must be to describe IRMA so prefectly.
It must be noted, however, that IRMA is fighting to protect the meagre incomes of people like U2 and Enya - who are all just managing to survive with one castle each.
Sarcasm aside, due to the fact that musicians have a tax exemption (cos lord knows U2 need it) - there are unfortunately a lot of them here, and they also have great wadges of cash. This in turn makes IRMA far more powerful than it should be.
I still don't think the other ISPs are just going to rollover - Eircom is a joke. They are largest because they were originally a monopoly - and there is a large number of users that are slow to change.