I've talked to the CEO and even he has admitted to having a preference for firefox over IE for example, even though the CIO hasn't officially or formally approved it.
Our company is quite a bit smaller, but we approve of things like Firefox. We even endorse and train users on the additional features.
However, we do lock down the machines so users can't install software. As others have said, users run wild and start trusting every application they see, or they have laptops and let their children use the machines and install bittorrent clients and whatnot and before we know it there are vast amounts of problems.
Our policy is that we must test all software in a test environment before okaying it to be installed. The software must be productivity based and not contain spyware or cause issues with our other applications. Additionally, the software has to be deemed better and/or cheaper than any alternatives we are currently using. Things we have approved so far include OpenOffice, Firefox, and OpenProj.
Seriously, that's fine. You keep using IE 6 all you like. Just bear in mind that once your preferred broken browser is in the minority , us web developers will stop spending hours or days at a time going out of way to make our sites not look and work like complete and total ass in it.
Incorrect. Guess what the police would do if they obtained pics of these underaged kids drinking? Absolutely nothing, because it would be impossible to prove that what's in those containers is alcohol.
As others have said, this all has to do with one thing: power. It's a lot easier to control kids than it is to teach them, so that's what schools do.
I honestly couldn't agree more. We have seen the same things in our hometown. Schools seem to be policing more than they are teaching. The school's responsibility is to provide instruction and education to students while they are at school. We pay TAX dollars for this!
If only there was someone we could contact if students were breaking the law. Oh wait, there is. We pay taxes for police too...
Here's a novel idea. Allow the people we pay taxes for to do their respective jobs.
True, Facebook users do whine about a lot of things. Like the ability to keep information private that we don't want others to see while still being able to share information with our friends. I would applaud the average person's desire to keep information private.
Secondly, Facebook users DO harness their energy and invoke real social change. There are THOUSANDS of groups and "Causes" devoted to organizations like FreeRice.com, Red, AIDS / HIV Research, ASPCA, Breast Cancer Research, Domestic Abuse, and so on. Don't believe? Have a look yourself. Facebook Causes or Socially Conscious Networking - Facebook. Next time do a little research before stereotyping 55 million people. Facebook Factsheet
Facebook users complain about a lot of bad things that are happening, but the media only listens to "controversial" topics that they can make money off of.
Even if that pans out, it's really not equivalent to what the telcos and cable companies can offer in terms of bandwidth. Plus, home owners have to put up with antennas and powered NIDs. I agree, in terms of speeds and reliability hard lines will always prove better than wireless. But, if I have to sacrifice my 3Mb/256Kb filtered connection for a 768Kb/128Kb unfiltered connection I will.
Once users (even the dumb ones) realize the content they want to access they can't, or that they have to pay extra, they will start looking for alternatives. A great example of this is Satellite vs. Cable. Cable is much more reliable than Satellite but costs more than Satellite on a per channel basis. If the Tel Cos start losing customers in droves they will rethink their policies and pricing and become more competitive.
It is very naive to believe there is a viable competitor waiting in the wings. There isn't one. There isn't going to be one tomorrow, next year or anytime in the foreseeable future. No company has the money and influence to duplicate the infrastructure and there are no viable wireless technologies available to bypass the last mile. It's going to be a duopoly for the foreseeable future and free market economics don't apply. Wrong. There ARE wireless technologies available that bypass the last mile. In fact, that bypass the last five, ten, sometimes twenty miles. (This is just one example). http://www.trangobroadband.com/products/point_to_m ultipoint_products.shtml
I have a job site currently that is fed T1 speeds over a wireless signal because the wired infrastructure doesn't exist there. The fact of the matter is that no local companies have the resources to put up transmission towers or get licensing for use of water towers to provide the signal because the costs are to high and the demand is too low. The wireless hardware available today can provide amazing back haul speeds and can produce signals up to 30 miles LOS. If Google has enough dark fiber all you need to do is give them transmission towers, wireless hardware, and a public tired of poor Internet access and I'm sure that's enough incentive to light some up and make some money off the Tel Cos mistakes.
This is state. Recording laws vary state to state and in PA, it's a state where all participants in a conversation must be informed they are being recorded (for audio at least). There are plenty of states this is not the case for. This all predates 9/11, Bush, and whatever other big brother federal things you are thinking of by quite some time. This is very true. States laws unfortunately very. MOST states have statutes that say that public officials do not have the same rights when it comes to consent for audio or video recording. I recently tested this out when police raided a party and demanded that I put down my camera. It took another "smarter" officer to explain to her colleague that our videotaping them was within our constitutional rights. This guy is going to have one heck of a time fighting this.
Link to the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apy6ukLDsNw
Want to make inroads:
1. Corporate workstations. That means in particular
a. Exchange replacement
b. Policy management like Active Directory
c. Heavy compatibility work with MS Office
The open source community talks a lot about the mass usage of open source products, but the
issue is what Kjella stated. I would love nothing more than to switch out all of our servers,
workstations and software with open source, I could use our budget for important things like
servers, workstations, routers, switches, etc and not software.
So as soon as a full server option is released, with an active directory equivalent, gpo, and
exchange equivalent that might be an option. While I personally use many open source apps,
OpenOffice, VNC, and a plethora of security tools, the average user can't handle anything more
difficult than Windows. Not to mention, anything different. The fact that firefox looks like
a fox and not a blue E alone can be a problem. Users hate change, and often will refuse to
change whenever possible.
Charging for Open Source will only guarantee its demise. Marketing, better support (drivers),
more available software, and more marketing will help it survive.
If you're an admin, why do you care about a GUI? I know I damn well wouldn't hire an admin who couldn't read a manpage and edit a config file.
Because GUIs are pretty, duh. Seriously, command line is great and all, but sometimes it's nice to configure a system or run a maintenance program without typing twenty commands. Also, GUIs allow the visual grouping of tools and make it easier for admins to find the tools they need. Operating systems should offer both command line and GUI tools for all programs.
Because submitted papers remain the intellectual property of their
authors, instructors, and respective institutions, we are unable to
show you the content of this paper at this time.
If you would still like to view this paper, your instructor may be
able to request permission to view the paper from the instructor to
whom the paper was originally submitted.
As as student I have major issues with knowing that all a person
has to do is receive permission from my instructor to receive a
full original copy of my work, and turnitin.com makes money off of
this service.
I have written several research papers on research that I have done
on my own and find it sickening that others have access to my
research work without my express consent.
I personally can't wait until a coding flaw on their website allows
Google to crawl all of the papers ever submitted and everyone sees
the true problem with keeping works that don't belong to you on the
Internet.
If turnitin.com would like to change their policy to only scan and
compare received works to copyrighted works and keep no copy of my
original work I would support them. But the fact that it is my
intellectual property gives me the right to choose who can and
cannot use it for any reason. If I choose to sell my work to
someone else that is my choice, just as it is to restrict anyone
from using my work to make a profit.
I intend to test turnitin.com by submitting one of my already
submitted works to their service and see what results I receive.
I'm curious to find out if I am able to see any of my work, or am
able to successfully obtain access to my work through the
instructor posed as another instructor or student. Wouldn't it be
interesting to find out that turnitin.com provides access to
intellectual property without consent of the writer for a price?
The article actually says "First University in Indiana".
I live in MI and Western Michigan University has required
its Freshmen to have a laptop since 2004. This is old news.
Universities want to make sure that their students understand
that a computer is a necessity for going to college and not
to spend that two grand on booze and partying.
It's a good requirement, each college student should have a
laptop.
Let's take all of the money that we spend on eduction, from educating
our children, to educating the poor, and feed the hungry children in
XYZ country.
The countries this technology is going to are looking to further educate
their youth and prepare them for a changing world market.
Having access to a laptop and the Internet enable these youth to have
access to an infinite amount of information. If we can get the technology
to that price there isn't any reason that every child shouldn't have
one.
:) You're right. It seems as though there are more and more votech schools that are just churning out paper MCSE, A+, etc students that have no real hands on experience, have no other abilities other than PC repair and yet are placed in these IT roles that they aren't qualified for.
I remember when I first started out I had an ISP tech support job. I had finished my CCNA track (4 semesters of school, actual in class, on real routers schooling) and the best I could do was help desk. I tried to get a job as a PC repair tech for a local consulting firm and was told that they would not consider hiring me until I had a minimum of an MCP! Reluctantly I went and got my MCP, suffered through 2 years at that job and was able to use the experience from that position to later further my career. Since then I have not been required to have any specific certifications, but without that I'm not sure how I would have gotten my foot in the door.
To some extent I agree with you. I highly respect indiviuals with engineering degrees because I am aware of the grueling courses such as Calc and Linear Algebra as I took these in high school while enrolled in a advanced Mathematics and Science Center. However, for a person who is pursuing a position as an administrator (or whatever title society deems correct) that wants a career in the networking field, its extremely difficult to do so without some type of certification.
The counter to your argument regarding 4 year degrees. Two things. First, there are very very few reputable accredited Universities that actually offer a 4 year degree in the networking field. Meaning that you take classes relating to operating systems, hardware, networking, security, data backup, etc. I currently am going to a University that offers these things and will shortly be finishing with a degree in networking, most likely most of you haven't even heard of this school. www.davenport.edu. Is it the best school, not even close, but until educators decide that networking is actually a field that requires a degree program we won't start to see our State schools offering these degrees. Even after I have graduated with my degree, I will continue to pursue certifications, as employers see this as a way to verify that their potential hire is still current on new technologies. Second, will the degree program I finish this upcoming year include all the technologies for the next 20? Just because I'll have a degree in a year doesn't mean that the knowledge from it will be pertinent or current 5 years from now.
As for engineering, engineers as you describe (based on your definition above) have no business administrating networks. Why would I want to hire a mechanical engineer to replace a Cisco 3640? Why would someone in the networking field need four semesters of Calc, or several of physics? Why would a chemical engineer need an MCSE? I work with both mechanical and electical engineers in my currect position as an IT Manager for a pipe fabrication and sheet metal firm that does contracting for Pfizer and Stryker. These guys definitely aren't idiots, most of them graduated from U of M with their engineering degree, and not one of them could tell me what gigabit ethernet is.
Only one thing can happen to prevent the ever dreaded paper MCSE, CCNA, and so on. Schools nationwide need to create degree programs to cater to the ever growing field of IT (not CS, not programming which can be found at any public university) but actual networking, routing, security, sys admin, etc. Until then, HR in corporations will have no idea what criteria to hire based upon, and will have to resort on certifications and experience as deciding factors.
So I take it that you have a degree in some type of Engineering? I'm 3/4 of the way through a degree in Network Engineering, so I suppose if I take a position as a Network or Systems Engineer after I graduate I would be doing the world a huge injustice?
An engineer by definition is someone who plans, builds or designs. Or, you can even go as far as saying that it is someone who operates an engine.
See your examples were just asinine. Doctor, has about 20 different definitions most relating to medicine. A lawyer has suprisingly two definitions, "one who gives legal advice...etc" and "serpent":) j/k
I'm curious to find out what person graduated with a 4 yr degree in Engineering but yet never took an intro to persuasive writing class, or maybe even Col. Writ. 110. Apples to apples, not apples to carburetors.
And finally, the stopper to my rambling. To answer your question "Why would an Engineer get an MCSE", I'll ask a question. Why would a MD go back to school to become a cardiologist? Because that's what he needs to do to become specialized in that field and to become respected and accredited for those qualifications. And to get a new Bentley.
I completely agree. A few years back you could simply pick up a transcender and memorize the questions and pass the test the next day. Its not like that anymore. True, you can still find a few places that have actual test questions, but for the most part all you are going to find are questions from previous versions of the test, that at the very best give you a feel for how the questions are written and what will be expected.
Anyone who has their CCNA (which btw I hope all of you critizing certifications has at least a CCNP or CCIE seeing as how worthless they are) will know that just because its a paper test and not a hands on exam doesn't mean that you aren't thrown into real life instances.
Certifications are around for a point. Whether HR knows as much as a MOUS or as much as a CCIE they don't have the time or resources to manually qualify each applicant. Imagine sitting with 300 applicants asking each to install Win2K3 with Exchange.
Certifications at the very least say "This guy at least had the initiative to get off his behind and pay the $125.00 to take the test and pass it." That's better than the guy next to him that either didn't or failed.
Slashdot Mirror
Our company is quite a bit smaller, but we approve of things like Firefox. We even endorse and train users on the additional features.
However, we do lock down the machines so users can't install software. As others have said, users run wild and start trusting every application they see, or they have laptops and let their children use the machines and install bittorrent clients and whatnot and before we know it there are vast amounts of problems.
Our policy is that we must test all software in a test environment before okaying it to be installed. The software must be productivity based and not contain spyware or cause issues with our other applications. Additionally, the software has to be deemed better and/or cheaper than any alternatives we are currently using. Things we have approved so far include OpenOffice, Firefox, and OpenProj.
?php
$txt = "Problem solved";
$internet_browser = firefox.exe;
?
"They took our jaorbs!"
If only there was someone we could contact if students were breaking the law. Oh wait, there is. We pay taxes for police too...
Here's a novel idea. Allow the people we pay taxes for to do their respective jobs.
True, Facebook users do whine about a lot of things. Like the ability to keep information private that we don't want others to see while still being able to share information with our friends. I would applaud the average person's desire to keep information private.
Secondly, Facebook users DO harness their energy and invoke real social change. There are THOUSANDS of groups and "Causes" devoted to organizations like FreeRice.com, Red, AIDS / HIV Research, ASPCA, Breast Cancer Research, Domestic Abuse, and so on. Don't believe? Have a look yourself. Facebook Causes or Socially Conscious Networking - Facebook. Next time do a little research before stereotyping 55 million people. Facebook Factsheet
Facebook users complain about a lot of bad things that are happening, but the media only listens to "controversial" topics that they can make money off of.
I have a job site currently that is fed T1 speeds over a wireless signal because the wired infrastructure doesn't exist there. The fact of the matter is that no local companies have the resources to put up transmission towers or get licensing for use of water towers to provide the signal because the costs are to high and the demand is too low. The wireless hardware available today can provide amazing back haul speeds and can produce signals up to 30 miles LOS. If Google has enough dark fiber all you need to do is give them transmission towers, wireless hardware, and a public tired of poor Internet access and I'm sure that's enough incentive to light some up and make some money off the Tel Cos mistakes.
Want to make inroads: 1. Corporate workstations. That means in particular a. Exchange replacement b. Policy management like Active Directory c. Heavy compatibility work with MS Office
The open source community talks a lot about the mass usage of open source products, but the issue is what Kjella stated. I would love nothing more than to switch out all of our servers, workstations and software with open source, I could use our budget for important things like servers, workstations, routers, switches, etc and not software.
So as soon as a full server option is released, with an active directory equivalent, gpo, and exchange equivalent that might be an option. While I personally use many open source apps, OpenOffice, VNC, and a plethora of security tools, the average user can't handle anything more difficult than Windows. Not to mention, anything different. The fact that firefox looks like a fox and not a blue E alone can be a problem. Users hate change, and often will refuse to change whenever possible.
Charging for Open Source will only guarantee its demise. Marketing, better support (drivers), more available software, and more marketing will help it survive.
If you're an admin, why do you care about a GUI? I know I damn well wouldn't hire an admin who couldn't read a manpage and edit a config file.
Because GUIs are pretty, duh. Seriously, command line is great and all, but sometimes it's nice to configure a system
or run a maintenance program without typing twenty commands. Also, GUIs allow the visual grouping of tools and make
it easier for admins to find the tools they need. Operating systems should offer both command line and GUI tools for
all programs.
just my couple pennies
I believe that turnitin.com is using thier site to provide a peer to peer resource for papers and making a profit doing it.
From turnitin.com http://www.turnitin.com/paperPermission.asp
Because submitted papers remain the intellectual property of their
authors, instructors, and respective institutions, we are unable to
show you the content of this paper at this time.
If you would still like to view this paper, your instructor may be
able to request permission to view the paper from the instructor to
whom the paper was originally submitted.
As as student I have major issues with knowing that all a person has to do is receive permission from my instructor to receive a full original copy of my work, and turnitin.com makes money off of this service.
I have written several research papers on research that I have done on my own and find it sickening that others have access to my research work without my express consent.
I personally can't wait until a coding flaw on their website allows Google to crawl all of the papers ever submitted and everyone sees the true problem with keeping works that don't belong to you on the Internet.
If turnitin.com would like to change their policy to only scan and compare received works to copyrighted works and keep no copy of my original work I would support them. But the fact that it is my intellectual property gives me the right to choose who can and cannot use it for any reason. If I choose to sell my work to someone else that is my choice, just as it is to restrict anyone from using my work to make a profit.
I intend to test turnitin.com by submitting one of my already submitted works to their service and see what results I receive. I'm curious to find out if I am able to see any of my work, or am able to successfully obtain access to my work through the instructor posed as another instructor or student. Wouldn't it be interesting to find out that turnitin.com provides access to intellectual property without consent of the writer for a price?
Just a couple of cents
The article actually says "First University in Indiana".
I live in MI and Western Michigan University has required its Freshmen to have a laptop since 2004. This is old news.
Universities want to make sure that their students understand that a computer is a necessity for going to college and not to spend that two grand on booze and partying.
It's a good requirement, each college student should have a laptop.
This ideology is great.
In fact here's an awesome idea.
Let's take all of the money that we spend on eduction, from educating our children, to educating the poor, and feed the hungry children in XYZ country.
The countries this technology is going to are looking to further educate their youth and prepare them for a changing world market. Having access to a laptop and the Internet enable these youth to have access to an infinite amount of information. If we can get the technology to that price there isn't any reason that every child shouldn't have one.
I remember when I first started out I had an ISP tech support job. I had finished my CCNA track (4 semesters of school, actual in class, on real routers schooling) and the best I could do was help desk. I tried to get a job as a PC repair tech for a local consulting firm and was told that they would not consider hiring me until I had a minimum of an MCP! Reluctantly I went and got my MCP, suffered through 2 years at that job and was able to use the experience from that position to later further my career. Since then I have not been required to have any specific certifications, but without that I'm not sure how I would have gotten my foot in the door.
The counter to your argument regarding 4 year degrees. Two things. First, there are very very few reputable accredited Universities that actually offer a 4 year degree in the networking field. Meaning that you take classes relating to operating systems, hardware, networking, security, data backup, etc. I currently am going to a University that offers these things and will shortly be finishing with a degree in networking, most likely most of you haven't even heard of this school. www.davenport.edu. Is it the best school, not even close, but until educators decide that networking is actually a field that requires a degree program we won't start to see our State schools offering these degrees. Even after I have graduated with my degree, I will continue to pursue certifications, as employers see this as a way to verify that their potential hire is still current on new technologies. Second, will the degree program I finish this upcoming year include all the technologies for the next 20? Just because I'll have a degree in a year doesn't mean that the knowledge from it will be pertinent or current 5 years from now.
As for engineering, engineers as you describe (based on your definition above) have no business administrating networks. Why would I want to hire a mechanical engineer to replace a Cisco 3640? Why would someone in the networking field need four semesters of Calc, or several of physics? Why would a chemical engineer need an MCSE? I work with both mechanical and electical engineers in my currect position as an IT Manager for a pipe fabrication and sheet metal firm that does contracting for Pfizer and Stryker. These guys definitely aren't idiots, most of them graduated from U of M with their engineering degree, and not one of them could tell me what gigabit ethernet is.
Only one thing can happen to prevent the ever dreaded paper MCSE, CCNA, and so on. Schools nationwide need to create degree programs to cater to the ever growing field of IT (not CS, not programming which can be found at any public university) but actual networking, routing, security, sys admin, etc. Until then, HR in corporations will have no idea what criteria to hire based upon, and will have to resort on certifications and experience as deciding factors.
An engineer by definition is someone who plans, builds or designs. Or, you can even go as far as saying that it is someone who operates an engine.
See your examples were just asinine. Doctor, has about 20 different definitions most relating to medicine. A lawyer has suprisingly two definitions, "one who gives legal advice...etc" and "serpent" :) j/k
I'm curious to find out what person graduated with a 4 yr degree in Engineering but yet never took an intro to persuasive writing class, or maybe even Col. Writ. 110. Apples to apples, not apples to carburetors.
And finally, the stopper to my rambling. To answer your question "Why would an Engineer get an MCSE", I'll ask a question. Why would a MD go back to school to become a cardiologist? Because that's what he needs to do to become specialized in that field and to become respected and accredited for those qualifications.
And to get a new Bentley.
Certifications are around for a point. Whether HR knows as much as a MOUS or as much as a CCIE they don't have the time or resources to manually qualify each applicant. Imagine sitting with 300 applicants asking each to install Win2K3 with Exchange.
Certifications at the very least say "This guy at least had the initiative to get off his behind and pay the $125.00 to take the test and pass it." That's better than the guy next to him that either didn't or failed.