There was a story not too long ago about the domain being up for sale. Apparently the owner has become a father, and is trying to become "respectable" for his kid. White House Apple Juice has been after the domain for years and is probably going to buy it.
That's exactly his message. It's all about networking. Target the people you need to know on the inside of the company you want to work for and make them your friends.
C'mon, look at the context. The name of the site is asktheheadhunter.com. Whose interests do they have in mind?
Actually, I've been on his mailing list for about a year, and I've found his writings to be very insightful.
Common sense ought to tell you that when a decent job with decent pay pops up on a national job board, there's going to be a lot of competition. I know my own company's experience with FlipDog was that they were OVERWHELMED with responses, to the point that stopped using the service.
The ATH newsletter is all about circumventing the traditional job application process, getting your foot in the door at the company you want to work at BEFORE the job is posted, and making a strong impression instead of just being one resume in a stack of thousands. His suggestions will undoubtably push you to be more outgoing than what most job seekers are comfortable with, but that's what puts you ahead of everybody else in the game.
a way for Microsoft to undermine those two operating systems and push for corporate users to adopt XP much more rapidly?
Maybe Microsoft released the source code and is treating it as a leak. After all, it's not the entire source code, and any critical parts may have been rewritten under XP.
Does Apple have any DRM in QuickTime that's comparable to WM DRM? I don't work in video production, so I honestly don't know, but it seems to me that MS is taking the lead in video DRM.
Also, licensing WM DRM does not necessarily preclude using Quicktime also, it just would have been nice if Disney used Quicktime exclusively.
It is a curious choice, however, given that Quicktime licensing is dramatically cheaper than WM.
But when the industry leader says there's no profits to be had and that they simply operate it as a loss leader for other more profitable divisions, that doesn't bode well for the latecomers who are racking up huge losses right out of the gate.
OEM pricing will ALWAYS be better on the PC because OEMs are who sell computers. Apple is the only Mac OEM, and therefore they're the only ones authorized to sell you Office 2004 at OEM prices.
The point of this whole thread is, THERE IS NO MAC OEM PRICING.
they maintain a monopoly on Windows office suites because of their competitive pricing. There have been a lot more attempts to dethrone them on the PC than there have been on the Mac.
Where did Win 98 come from? Win 2000 users are upgrading, too.
Unlike Microsoft, Apple doesn't offer a stripped down version of OS X, so all OS X upgrades are $129, whereas the Win 2000 Pro and Win XP Pro upgrades were both $199.
And Apple is trying to push OS X server. They need to do whatever they can to even get to 1/10% market share in that market.
Who cares what the reason is? All I care is that I can get an industrial strength server with an unlimited client license for a fraction of the cost of a Windows 2003 server.
People get those rates because of deals that companies like Dell, HP, etc. negotiated with Microsoft.
No, they get those hardware bundle rates because Microsoft offers them for Windows systems. You can get it, too, just go up on PriceWatch and see how cheap you can get Office 2003 with the purchase of a hard drive.
HP and Dell get an even GREATER discount than you are able to get because of the volume of units they move.
Three reasons to discriminate against Mac users:
1) They have a virtual monopoly on office software for the Mac. Therefore, they can charge each and every Mac user full pop without fear of losing marketshare. I believe Office has consistently been the top-selling software title for Macintosh for a number of years, so what's the motivation to cut the price?
2) It contributes to the general belief that Macs are overpriced. You spend a couple hundred more on the hardware, and then you have to spend an extra $200 more than Windows users for Office? It helps price Macs out of the competitive price range of Wintel systems.
3) Keep Macs out of the lucrative corporate market. Again, they'll sell in volume discount their Windows solutions, but corporate Mac users are stuck.
On the contrary, Apple gives a lot software away for free, and the software it does sell is priced significantly below Microsoft's prices.
Don't believe me? Go check out the price differences between OS X Server, which has an unlimited user license, and Windows 2003 Server, with, say, a 100 client license.
Or just price the Windows XP Pro upgrade against OS X Panther upgrade.
Most people who buy Microsoft Office for Windows buy it at a significantly reduced hardware bundle rate, whereas Microsoft offers no such deals for Mac users. All Mac users must pay full retail sticker for MS Office.
Just another way that MS discriminates against the Mac.
Yeah isn't it funny how all of the "great" Disney movies were nothing more than remakes of old stories, legends, etc that are in the public domain, and yet they are fighting tooth and nail to prevent their own works from ever going into the public domain?
It's true that Disney used well-known stories from the public domain to build their empire, but it also means that they can't stop 2-bit animation houses from slapping together their own versions of Aladdin, Snow White, Cinderella, The Little Mermaid, et. al. Disney spends a tremendous amount of money to build each brand they create, and they are powerless to keep others from diluting that brand.
The value of Pixar is that they are creating entirely NEW and popular brands that cannot be appropriated by others. Disney's own efforts to use public domain stories lately has done a big belly flop ("Treasure Planet"), and their attempts to create new brands haven't done too well, either ("Brother Bear," "Teacher's Pet"). Sadly, Eisner doesn't realize how badly he needs Pixar--or, maybe he does, and it scares him to be that reliant on another company.
Actually, it really *is* possible to get your costs down to an insignificant level in a small business.
Firstly, my email server bounces all emails with attachments like.exe,.scr,.pif, and the like. No virus coming in, and it generally buys enough time until the anti-virus software can be updated. Cost? Free. Setup time? Less than half an hour, and lasts indefinitely.
Secondly, I have Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition installed on a server and on all client workstations. It automatically downloads new updates every week. Ok, there was an initial cost to the program, I think $3,000; I haven't bought updates for a few years because it still works great. Why fix what ain't broke? There is the initial setup time, which is 5 minutes per machine, but once it's set up, I've never had to fiddle with it again. Cost plus my time? Realistically, it can be distributed over a three to four year time period, so maybe $600 a year?
This latest virus does do some.zip attachments, which can get past the email server filter, so it will be interesting to see what happens; but, I suspect not much.
SCO might be a good stock to short sell... Wall Street seems to think that SCO has the goods, we who are actually in the tech community are almost certain that SCO is full of crap.
Even if SCO can prove that some of their code worked its way into Linux, that code will be coming out within weeks, I guarantee, and they essentially lose again.
Not quite, the spams are selling a product at some point, someone is somehow receiving payment for doing the advertising and there is where you get them, whether it be the actual spammer or the company being advertised.
But what happens when your competitor decides to send out spam in your company's name? Habeas files suit against your competitor.
In fact, I can see spammers sending out a LOT of "bogus" spam with the haiku headers in order to get Habeus tied up in so many misguided lawsuits as to bankrupt them or otherwise marginalize their threat.
Sure, it's a cool idea, but the execution is fraught with problems.
Slashdot Mirror
First it was e-... eToys, eBay, e-dreamz
Then Steve Jobs came along, and convinced that "i" was a much cooler letter... iMac, iBook, iPod, iTunes.
Now everything is -ster... Napster, Friendster, Feedster, Dogster, BulkRegister (oh wait...).
WILL THE MADNESS NEVER END?!?!?
As you can see, my young apprentice, your friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational ball of Perl and MySQL!
There was a story not too long ago about the domain being up for sale. Apparently the owner has become a father, and is trying to become "respectable" for his kid. White House Apple Juice has been after the domain for years and is probably going to buy it.
That's exactly his message. It's all about networking. Target the people you need to know on the inside of the company you want to work for and make them your friends.
C'mon, look at the context. The name of the site is asktheheadhunter.com. Whose interests do they have in mind?
Actually, I've been on his mailing list for about a year, and I've found his writings to be very insightful.
Common sense ought to tell you that when a decent job with decent pay pops up on a national job board, there's going to be a lot of competition. I know my own company's experience with FlipDog was that they were OVERWHELMED with responses, to the point that stopped using the service.
The ATH newsletter is all about circumventing the traditional job application process, getting your foot in the door at the company you want to work at BEFORE the job is posted, and making a strong impression instead of just being one resume in a stack of thousands. His suggestions will undoubtably push you to be more outgoing than what most job seekers are comfortable with, but that's what puts you ahead of everybody else in the game.
A great resource, IMO.
1-900-867-5307.
Sure, I'll answer it all freakin' day long. For a modest charge of $24.95 per call.
a way for Microsoft to undermine those two operating systems and push for corporate users to adopt XP much more rapidly?
Maybe Microsoft released the source code and is treating it as a leak. After all, it's not the entire source code, and any critical parts may have been rewritten under XP.
Just a thought.
I find epinions.com to be pretty handy for getting reviews of consumer electronics.
Does Apple have any DRM in QuickTime that's comparable to WM DRM? I don't work in video production, so I honestly don't know, but it seems to me that MS is taking the lead in video DRM.
Also, licensing WM DRM does not necessarily preclude using Quicktime also, it just would have been nice if Disney used Quicktime exclusively.
It is a curious choice, however, given that Quicktime licensing is dramatically cheaper than WM.
But when the industry leader says there's no profits to be had and that they simply operate it as a loss leader for other more profitable divisions, that doesn't bode well for the latecomers who are racking up huge losses right out of the gate.
That's more of an oxymoron, isn't it?
OEM pricing will ALWAYS be better on the PC because OEMs are who sell computers. Apple is the only Mac OEM, and therefore they're the only ones authorized to sell you Office 2004 at OEM prices.
The point of this whole thread is, THERE IS NO MAC OEM PRICING.
they maintain a monopoly on Windows office suites because of their competitive pricing. There have been a lot more attempts to dethrone them on the PC than there have been on the Mac.
Where did Win 98 come from? Win 2000 users are upgrading, too.
Unlike Microsoft, Apple doesn't offer a stripped down version of OS X, so all OS X upgrades are $129, whereas the Win 2000 Pro and Win XP Pro upgrades were both $199.
And Apple is trying to push OS X server. They need to do whatever they can to even get to 1/10% market share in that market.
Who cares what the reason is? All I care is that I can get an industrial strength server with an unlimited client license for a fraction of the cost of a Windows 2003 server.
People get those rates because of deals that companies like Dell, HP, etc. negotiated with Microsoft.
No, they get those hardware bundle rates because Microsoft offers them for Windows systems. You can get it, too, just go up on PriceWatch and see how cheap you can get Office 2003 with the purchase of a hard drive.
HP and Dell get an even GREATER discount than you are able to get because of the volume of units they move.
Three reasons to discriminate against Mac users:
1) They have a virtual monopoly on office software for the Mac. Therefore, they can charge each and every Mac user full pop without fear of losing marketshare. I believe Office has consistently been the top-selling software title for Macintosh for a number of years, so what's the motivation to cut the price?
2) It contributes to the general belief that Macs are overpriced. You spend a couple hundred more on the hardware, and then you have to spend an extra $200 more than Windows users for Office? It helps price Macs out of the competitive price range of Wintel systems.
3) Keep Macs out of the lucrative corporate market. Again, they'll sell in volume discount their Windows solutions, but corporate Mac users are stuck.
On the contrary, Apple gives a lot software away for free, and the software it does sell is priced significantly below Microsoft's prices.
Don't believe me? Go check out the price differences between OS X Server, which has an unlimited user license, and Windows 2003 Server, with, say, a 100 client license.
Or just price the Windows XP Pro upgrade against OS X Panther upgrade.
How else are they going to get any work done when they get hit with these Outlook viruses?
Most people who buy Microsoft Office for Windows buy it at a significantly reduced hardware bundle rate, whereas Microsoft offers no such deals for Mac users. All Mac users must pay full retail sticker for MS Office.
Just another way that MS discriminates against the Mac.
Yeah isn't it funny how all of the "great" Disney movies were nothing more than remakes of old stories, legends, etc that are in the public domain, and yet they are fighting tooth and nail to prevent their own works from ever going into the public domain?
It's true that Disney used well-known stories from the public domain to build their empire, but it also means that they can't stop 2-bit animation houses from slapping together their own versions of Aladdin, Snow White, Cinderella, The Little Mermaid, et. al. Disney spends a tremendous amount of money to build each brand they create, and they are powerless to keep others from diluting that brand.
The value of Pixar is that they are creating entirely NEW and popular brands that cannot be appropriated by others. Disney's own efforts to use public domain stories lately has done a big belly flop ("Treasure Planet"), and their attempts to create new brands haven't done too well, either ("Brother Bear," "Teacher's Pet"). Sadly, Eisner doesn't realize how badly he needs Pixar--or, maybe he does, and it scares him to be that reliant on another company.
If we had sent a Wintel PC, it might have kicked off an interstellar conflict with the Martians...
Actually, it really *is* possible to get your costs down to an insignificant level in a small business.
.exe, .scr, .pif, and the like. No virus coming in, and it generally buys enough time until the anti-virus software can be updated. Cost? Free. Setup time? Less than half an hour, and lasts indefinitely.
.zip attachments, which can get past the email server filter, so it will be interesting to see what happens; but, I suspect not much.
Firstly, my email server bounces all emails with attachments like
Secondly, I have Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition installed on a server and on all client workstations. It automatically downloads new updates every week. Ok, there was an initial cost to the program, I think $3,000; I haven't bought updates for a few years because it still works great. Why fix what ain't broke? There is the initial setup time, which is 5 minutes per machine, but once it's set up, I've never had to fiddle with it again. Cost plus my time? Realistically, it can be distributed over a three to four year time period, so maybe $600 a year?
This latest virus does do some
Hmmm... could be interesting... lemesee...
+blonde +thirtysomething +"blue eyes" -kids +"36 24 36" -smoker +5'11" +model +"into geeky guys"
Wha? Zero results?
SCO might be a good stock to short sell... Wall Street seems to think that SCO has the goods, we who are actually in the tech community are almost certain that SCO is full of crap.
Even if SCO can prove that some of their code worked its way into Linux, that code will be coming out within weeks, I guarantee, and they essentially lose again.
Not quite, the spams are selling a product at some point, someone is somehow receiving payment for doing the advertising and there is where you get them, whether it be the actual spammer or the company being advertised.
But what happens when your competitor decides to send out spam in your company's name? Habeas files suit against your competitor.
In fact, I can see spammers sending out a LOT of "bogus" spam with the haiku headers in order to get Habeus tied up in so many misguided lawsuits as to bankrupt them or otherwise marginalize their threat.
Sure, it's a cool idea, but the execution is fraught with problems.
or howzabout...
"The Insult That Made a 1337 d00d Out Of Mac"