You're in a position where your boss depends on you. And he's promoting it. Who cares what management thinks. Is your paycheck sufficient? If not, just wait until a few weeks before the next big delivery and tell your boss you've found another job offering you what you think you should get paid. Since he's on the hook, he'll probably try to keep you happy.
Never ever use the 'well they offered me more across the street' strategy. In this day and age, IT workers are cogs. Remember those 30 guys and gals in all the same classes as you? Any of them could get hired for your job. From the company's perspective, you are easily replaced.
By all means, ask for more money if you think you deserve it. Never ever mention a competing offer unless you are giving notice. Even then it's better not to burn bridges. "Hi, I just got this great opportunity that is too good to pass up. Wish you well, goodbye." Will serve you a lot better than, "Remember that project? You should have given me credit."
Why? Because your manager may get you the raise, or turn you down for it. Meanwhile, he makes a call to HR and your job is posted on Monster. Two weeks later you get a pink slip.
As for the credit issue. Show up on time. Be professional in your appearance, demeanor and attitude. Do good work at all aspects of your job. Look for opportunities to shine. Do not anyone take credit for your work other than those above you. Do the same for your bosses, watching for others taking credit for your bosses' work. Get the work done on time and correctly consistently and they will find you trustworthy and capable. They will mentor you if they have any sense.
As much as we all want the boss who gives credit consistently, those are rare. "My team did this." This is how you take credit as a manager. Then you get credit not only for the project but for being a good manager too.
Microsoft's hold on the OS market has its roots in their total domination of the office productivity market. In order for ANY desktop OS to make inroads into the market, they have to capture one or more market segments. There are several of these, including home users, gamers, office users, etc. Mac has captured the artistic intellectual niche. Linux is strong in the hobbyist market. Since game developers want the widest market they can get, they publish games for whatever OS's are strong in the home user market. Gamers will stay with whichever OS has the most games for it, so the gaming niche will follow the home market. And the home market will follow the office market, simply because most people don't want the hassle of learning a new OS, they just want something like what they have at work.
The primary hold Microsoft has is that people in the business world do not want to see change. If you tell them that their users have to change to [insert OS] with [insert productivity suite] starting on Monday, they will not care how good the new stuff is. They will not care how cheap or how easily maintained it is. They will only care that their productivity just went to zero.
THAT is why Microsoft has a stranglehold. That is also why OpenOffice.org and Open Document Format are so important.
SO, when I hear about these software-as-a-service products and web based applications, I start to see cracks in the foundation of Microsoft's domination of the office desktop market. If you can get a wedge into the productivity suite market, and replace enough MS Office suites, you can get people using the products, and once they're used to the products, you can swap the OS out from under them.
/soapbox off
Sorry for preaching to the choir. The linux fanbois will probably kill my karma, but trying to beat Windows feature for feature is pointless. As long as MS Office is king, Windows will retain its market share.
a. If you want to use my (open source) code in your software, then you must follow the terms of my license.
b. If you want to write your own (closed source) code in your software, then you can choose how to license it yourself.
It's really not that convoluted.
My new Green Bunny Software License (TM, all rights reserved) has some interesting requirements. First you have to take a picture of yourself, holding a green bunny, wearing blue silk pajamas and wearing zebra striped houseshoes. (No nudity please.) Then you have to fax me the picture and you have to jump up and down on one leg while patting your head with the opposite hand until the fax is completely sent. (I'm working on verification methods for this step, but until then it's honor code.) Once you meet these easy steps, you can use my code.
Yes, I'm being facetious, but the old fashioned way is just as convoluted.
Bottom line is, GPL allows developers to maintain Copyrights and at the same time allows them to contribute to the project. Some projects don't need to be open source.
Also, the "Free" in Free Software means to me that I can install something, and if I don't like it, I can change it. Rather than buy a license for something that installs ten other things that I don't want, and that I cannot legally or easily change that program. It is MY computer, I should have the last say on what is stored on it.
If what YOU want is to take the work of a community, CLOSE the source and slap your name on it and sell it for a profit, then I say you do want to steal. BTW, the license does not prohibit making a profit from OSS. RTFA again.
Personally, I believe it WAS accidental, especially in view of the other topics which were omitted. One of the others was HVAC. Real hot topic of discussion there.
Seriously, I do not believe in letting religious beliefs determine what scientists study. It is good that this omission was caught and that light is being shined upon it.
As for 'intelligent design', I get the impression that this is a compromise, a sort of guided evolution. An interesting idea, no doubt formulated to allow scientists to get past the illogic of blind faith creationism. So they can still be Christians without being hypocrites.
Sorry, trying to keep the sarcasm out of my post is giving me acid reflux. I have no tolerance for creationists of any stripe when they try to push science out of the science class. Save it for Bible study.
Umm, the OP left out the link to the article, someone found it and posted a quote from it and we're all blithely arguing about the out of context snippet.
Assume that your Windows box ran non-stop, without rebooting (which means you probably are not loading any Microsoft security updates) for 365 days. For your Linux box to have 20% more downtime it'd have to only be up for 292 days. If that is the case, your machine is no longer a server and is nothing more than a space heater.
Umm, if you have 0 downtime, and I have 20% more, it's still 0.
If Windows box had 10 hours downtime, and Linux had 20% more, that would be 12 hours.
First, decide whether you're going to read the comment you're responding to, decide whether you're going to talk about downtime or updtime and stick to it.
So, lets talk uptime. Do you count scheduled reboots against uptime? If they're done during offline hours? Our shop runs Windows and Linux servers. Windows security patches are typically released once a week. Assuming that they require a reboot, that's 4 reboots a month. Call it 50 per year. On the outside it takes 15 minutes to reboot. That's 12.5 hours per year for security patches. (365*24-12.5)/(365*24)*100 = 99.86% up time.
I'm still learning Linux, and not aware how often security patches are released, but I understand that they're released as they become available. But the only difference for us is how long it takes to reboot and how often. We haven't had to update them yet, so I don't know how long they take to reboot, but 15 minutes would be an ample amount of time. Since the Linux machine is only rebooted for a kernel update, the frequency is typically less.
We haven't had a problem with any of the servers resulting in downtime. Bottom line is that neither OS has horrible downtime.
Dude you must be like a PhD in math. You're wrong and the comment you're referring to was right.
0.9 + 0.2 * 0.9 = 0.9 + 0.18 = 1.08
or
0.9 + 0.2 * 0.9 = (1 + 0.2) * 0.9 = 1.2 * 0.9 = 1.08
Which is exactly what he said.
It must be wonderful to be so ignorantly naive. It is our duty to vote. If we do not vote, the system will not work. And if you do not vote, you need to STFU about political issues. It's like saying, I am against fires but I wouldn't, umm, pour water on a house if it were on fire. It is laziness.
Every adult citizen of the United States has the duty to, at the very least, vote against someone. You say they do not represent you. You need to dig deeper. I'm sure there is a candidate somewhere who represents similar views to yours. Or if you look and they're all scoundrels in your area, you got two basic choices, put forth a candidate (either yourself or someone else) or vote for the one you dislike least.
If I subscribe to a digital radio service, it will be because there are no commercials. If they add commercials, I will no longer pay. With TV I have little choice (other than putting up an antenna and getting 2 channels), but I go with satellite over cable because satellite already has digital music channels.
One poster mentioned NPR. I haven't found my local station. The only problem with NPR is that it is primarily talk radio.
The only advantages I see of digital radio over broadcast are:
1. No commercials. 2. Clear signal (I haven't tried it but it should be a nice signal...someone with experience chime in) 3. No commercials. 4. More targeted programming. 5. No commercials. 6. Wider Selection. 7. NO FREAKIN COMMERCIALS
Disadvantages: 1. You gotta pay 2. No local news and info 3. Pay to listen. 4. Needs special equipment. 5. You gots ta pay!
This is sad. Those poor kids. Of course 2000 pounds is a decent bit of cash. If they discuss the fact that the kids signed over their rights when they present the prize... never happen. Oh the irony.
Slashdot Mirror
Never ever use the 'well they offered me more across the street' strategy. In this day and age, IT workers are cogs. Remember those 30 guys and gals in all the same classes as you? Any of them could get hired for your job. From the company's perspective, you are easily replaced.
By all means, ask for more money if you think you deserve it. Never ever mention a competing offer unless you are giving notice. Even then it's better not to burn bridges. "Hi, I just got this great opportunity that is too good to pass up. Wish you well, goodbye." Will serve you a lot better than, "Remember that project? You should have given me credit."
Why? Because your manager may get you the raise, or turn you down for it. Meanwhile, he makes a call to HR and your job is posted on Monster. Two weeks later you get a pink slip.
As for the credit issue. Show up on time. Be professional in your appearance, demeanor and attitude. Do good work at all aspects of your job. Look for opportunities to shine. Do not anyone take credit for your work other than those above you. Do the same for your bosses, watching for others taking credit for your bosses' work. Get the work done on time and correctly consistently and they will find you trustworthy and capable. They will mentor you if they have any sense.
As much as we all want the boss who gives credit consistently, those are rare. "My team did this." This is how you take credit as a manager. Then you get credit not only for the project but for being a good manager too.
Religions are cults by definition, but the connotation of the word cult is extremely negative.
So, those elrons should be flattered to be grouped with Islam, Judaism, Catholicism, and Protestant Christianity.
Half their freakin employees must be lawyers. They seem to sue everyone.
Try to delete pinball.exe from your XP computer.
Seriously.
You'll find that it comes back when you restart the computer.
Should work in addition to / in place of 3.5" floppy drive. If the drive still works at all.
You're assuming that most users are like you.
As a seasoned support tech, I can assure you, they are not. I still get calls for help restarting computers.
Microsoft's hold on the OS market has its roots in their total domination of the office productivity market. In order for ANY desktop OS to make inroads into the market, they have to capture one or more market segments. There are several of these, including home users, gamers, office users, etc. Mac has captured the artistic intellectual niche. Linux is strong in the hobbyist market. Since game developers want the widest market they can get, they publish games for whatever OS's are strong in the home user market. Gamers will stay with whichever OS has the most games for it, so the gaming niche will follow the home market. And the home market will follow the office market, simply because most people don't want the hassle of learning a new OS, they just want something like what they have at work.
The primary hold Microsoft has is that people in the business world do not want to see change. If you tell them that their users have to change to [insert OS] with [insert productivity suite] starting on Monday, they will not care how good the new stuff is. They will not care how cheap or how easily maintained it is. They will only care that their productivity just went to zero.
THAT is why Microsoft has a stranglehold. That is also why OpenOffice.org and Open Document Format are so important.
SO, when I hear about these software-as-a-service products and web based applications, I start to see cracks in the foundation of Microsoft's domination of the office desktop market. If you can get a wedge into the productivity suite market, and replace enough MS Office suites, you can get people using the products, and once they're used to the products, you can swap the OS out from under them.
/soapbox off
Sorry for preaching to the choir. The linux fanbois will probably kill my karma, but trying to beat Windows feature for feature is pointless. As long as MS Office is king, Windows will retain its market share.
a. If you want to use my (open source) code in your software, then you must follow the terms of my license. b. If you want to write your own (closed source) code in your software, then you can choose how to license it yourself. It's really not that convoluted. My new Green Bunny Software License (TM, all rights reserved) has some interesting requirements. First you have to take a picture of yourself, holding a green bunny, wearing blue silk pajamas and wearing zebra striped houseshoes. (No nudity please.) Then you have to fax me the picture and you have to jump up and down on one leg while patting your head with the opposite hand until the fax is completely sent. (I'm working on verification methods for this step, but until then it's honor code.) Once you meet these easy steps, you can use my code. Yes, I'm being facetious, but the old fashioned way is just as convoluted. Bottom line is, GPL allows developers to maintain Copyrights and at the same time allows them to contribute to the project. Some projects don't need to be open source. Also, the "Free" in Free Software means to me that I can install something, and if I don't like it, I can change it. Rather than buy a license for something that installs ten other things that I don't want, and that I cannot legally or easily change that program. It is MY computer, I should have the last say on what is stored on it. If what YOU want is to take the work of a community, CLOSE the source and slap your name on it and sell it for a profit, then I say you do want to steal. BTW, the license does not prohibit making a profit from OSS. RTFA again.
Personally, I believe it WAS accidental, especially in view of the other topics which were omitted. One of the others was HVAC. Real hot topic of discussion there. Seriously, I do not believe in letting religious beliefs determine what scientists study. It is good that this omission was caught and that light is being shined upon it. As for 'intelligent design', I get the impression that this is a compromise, a sort of guided evolution. An interesting idea, no doubt formulated to allow scientists to get past the illogic of blind faith creationism. So they can still be Christians without being hypocrites. Sorry, trying to keep the sarcasm out of my post is giving me acid reflux. I have no tolerance for creationists of any stripe when they try to push science out of the science class. Save it for Bible study.
Just so you know -- Zen came first. Creative was the market leader. Apple and iPod captured the market out from under Creative.
not even a word though it appears to be a name
Umm, the OP left out the link to the article, someone found it and posted a quote from it and we're all blithely arguing about the out of context snippet.
Assume that your Windows box ran non-stop, without rebooting (which means you probably are not loading any Microsoft security updates) for 365 days. For your Linux box to have 20% more downtime it'd have to only be up for 292 days. If that is the case, your machine is no longer a server and is nothing more than a space heater.
Umm, if you have 0 downtime, and I have 20% more, it's still 0.
If Windows box had 10 hours downtime, and Linux had 20% more, that would be 12 hours.
First, decide whether you're going to read the comment you're responding to, decide whether you're going to talk about downtime or updtime and stick to it.
So, lets talk uptime. Do you count scheduled reboots against uptime? If they're done during offline hours? Our shop runs Windows and Linux servers. Windows security patches are typically released once a week. Assuming that they require a reboot, that's 4 reboots a month. Call it 50 per year. On the outside it takes 15 minutes to reboot. That's 12.5 hours per year for security patches. (365*24-12.5)/(365*24)*100 = 99.86% up time.
I'm still learning Linux, and not aware how often security patches are released, but I understand that they're released as they become available. But the only difference for us is how long it takes to reboot and how often. We haven't had to update them yet, so I don't know how long they take to reboot, but 15 minutes would be an ample amount of time. Since the Linux machine is only rebooted for a kernel update, the frequency is typically less.
We haven't had a problem with any of the servers resulting in downtime. Bottom line is that neither OS has horrible downtime.
Dude you must be like a PhD in math. You're wrong and the comment you're referring to was right. 0.9 + 0.2 * 0.9 = 0.9 + 0.18 = 1.08 or 0.9 + 0.2 * 0.9 = (1 + 0.2) * 0.9 = 1.2 * 0.9 = 1.08 Which is exactly what he said.
It must be wonderful to be so ignorantly naive. It is our duty to vote. If we do not vote, the system will not work. And if you do not vote, you need to STFU about political issues. It's like saying, I am against fires but I wouldn't, umm, pour water on a house if it were on fire. It is laziness. Every adult citizen of the United States has the duty to, at the very least, vote against someone. You say they do not represent you. You need to dig deeper. I'm sure there is a candidate somewhere who represents similar views to yours. Or if you look and they're all scoundrels in your area, you got two basic choices, put forth a candidate (either yourself or someone else) or vote for the one you dislike least.
If I subscribe to a digital radio service, it will be because there are no commercials. If they add commercials, I will no longer pay. With TV I have little choice (other than putting up an antenna and getting 2 channels), but I go with satellite over cable because satellite already has digital music channels. One poster mentioned NPR. I haven't found my local station. The only problem with NPR is that it is primarily talk radio.
Find USBserial adapter. Saw one at Wal-Mart.
The only advantages I see of digital radio over broadcast are:
1. No commercials.
2. Clear signal (I haven't tried it but it should be a nice signal...someone with experience chime in)
3. No commercials.
4. More targeted programming.
5. No commercials.
6. Wider Selection.
7. NO FREAKIN COMMERCIALS
Disadvantages:
1. You gotta pay
2. No local news and info
3. Pay to listen.
4. Needs special equipment.
5. You gots ta pay!
TANSTAFL
This is sad. Those poor kids. Of course 2000 pounds is a decent bit of cash. If they discuss the fact that the kids signed over their rights when they present the prize... never happen. Oh the irony.