It's a shame that someone saw fit to mod my post down instead of either reading the link or providing a rebuttal. Since I suspect the former I'll clarify the point:
For quite a while after virtually every MS story had a bunch of +5 comments to the tune of "RTFA". The summaries got the stories wrong and people were finding if they read the article they could chime in on it and get modded up. That's where all these 'apologists' and 'fanboys' came from.
There were plenty of things to despise Microsoft for, but if you got all your M$ news from Slashdot, you may want to do a little research on your own.
For a while now, Microsoft has been trying to "clean up" its image, but for anyone who's been around here for any amount of time will remember why they've needed to in the first place. History isn't a cheery place, and it makes no sense to try to look at it with rose tinted glasses.
Go ask anyone who's ever had to reformat their hard drive because of a virus.
Not as big of deal as you're making it out to be, otherwise Windows 7 wouldn't have been such a hit.
Personally I think it's a matter of people saying "Eh, it's not an iPhone and it's not Android, and they're not showing me anything new I give a shit about."
I can buy almost any song ever made using my telephone and within a minute or so it will be available for listening, having been downloaded as a I sat in a cafe drinking coffee.
Do you know why you can do that? I'll give you a hint, it ain't cos of the RIAA.
True, but you'd have to know that it happened. All the company has to do is say: "We're not interested at this time.", not: "We heard about what you did to the server, forget it."
That's why you should use appropriate encryption policies for you business data!
You can encrypt data all you want, it won't stop your employees from being able to access the files they need to work with.
You would have had a better shot at getting the word 'Insightful' next to your post if you had used the word 'permissions', but my reply kicks that idea down, too.
Not necessarily. A lot of companies are too concerned about lawsuits to say anything other than job title and start/end dates. They blacklist you at their company, of course, but there's not a lot of interest in informing other companies; just risk with no real upside, prudent policy generally shun references.
I don't know about the industry you're in but in my field there is a lot of personal networking going on. (That's why Facebook and LinkedIn actually are important to me.) If I sabotaged a workplace and any of my buddies found out about it, I would have a verrrrrrrry difficult time finding work because they'd speak up. I personally have a couple of names I know I'll speak up against over release of confidential data.
This may not be a factor in your field, but you should consider how every year more and more people get connected to social networking. The whole "what happened at the company stays at the company" philosophy is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.
I honestly don't understand. IT people need to be trusted with very important data. Each time one of these surveys come out they demonstrate that they can't be trusted with data.
I do wonder how that question was actually phrased. With a couple of exceptions, at every job I've worked at I've had data from that job end up at home. Maybe it's because I did a hard-drive backup just for my own peace of mind. Maybe it's because I used my laptop to do some work and never bothered to clear it off. Maybe it's because I worked from home. If somebody asked me if after a layoff I'd still have data, I'd probably have to answer 'yes'. And I'd probably hold on to it even though it'd more than likely never see the light of day.
I wouldn't really call that a breach of trust. I mean, from a 'letter of the law' sort of view, yeah I can see that being offensive. But at the same time lots of these jobs basically require you to blur the line between your personal machine and your work machine. They can't have tight data control and the productivity benefit of using all the resources at your disposal.
The low power ram accounts for 17% of the battery life.
Why wouldn't we pretend the SSD, thickness, and screen aren't valuable? They're all factors of the price! Or do you mean that you personally don't care?
Perhaps you didn't do the proper research before buying your phone
The Tab is a Tablet.:)
Perhaps you purchased a device with planned obsolescence built in.
Perhaps I have purchased a phone and never had a complaint about the battery life.
Oh, speaking of design flaws: The last three phones with replaceable batteries I had both broke at the battery compartment. With two of them, the battery would get knocked out just enough to break the power, and I wouldn't know the brick in my pocket wasn't going to ring when somebody called.
Wanting to have a large hard drive is not a mental defect. I cannot speak for him but the reason I have purchased MBP's in the past is I have *work* to do. I can easily chew up several gigs just working on one element of a project. I've had to go the external drive route before and besides risking somebody walking away with it and some sensitive data, it eats power and reduces mobility.
Seriously, on this site in particular, I cannot believe some wanker would come along and mod up your post. "Pffftbtbt, large hard drives are for loseres.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a shame that someone saw fit to mod my post down instead of either reading the link or providing a rebuttal. Since I suspect the former I'll clarify the point:
Here is the original article.
Here is a different account of the story.
For quite a while after virtually every MS story had a bunch of +5 comments to the tune of "RTFA". The summaries got the stories wrong and people were finding if they read the article they could chime in on it and get modded up. That's where all these 'apologists' and 'fanboys' came from.
There were plenty of things to despise Microsoft for, but if you got all your M$ news from Slashdot, you may want to do a little research on your own.
For a while now, Microsoft has been trying to "clean up" its image, but for anyone who's been around here for any amount of time will remember why they've needed to in the first place. History isn't a cheery place, and it makes no sense to try to look at it with rose tinted glasses.
If it was that bad why did Slashdot need to run stories with misleading summaries to make MS look bad?
Go ask anyone who's ever had to reformat their hard drive because of a virus.
Not as big of deal as you're making it out to be, otherwise Windows 7 wouldn't have been such a hit.
Personally I think it's a matter of people saying "Eh, it's not an iPhone and it's not Android, and they're not showing me anything new I give a shit about."
I can buy almost any song ever made using my telephone and within a minute or so it will be available for listening, having been downloaded as a I sat in a cafe drinking coffee.
Do you know why you can do that? I'll give you a hint, it ain't cos of the RIAA.
In this job market? How are you even going to narrow it down?
True, but you'd have to know that it happened. All the company has to do is say: "We're not interested at this time.", not: "We heard about what you did to the server, forget it."
Yeah, my company has policies like that. It makes for a hostile work environment. Very little trust.
Serious question: Do you have cases where things like permissions issues cause people to get paranoid?
That's why you should use appropriate encryption policies for you business data!
You can encrypt data all you want, it won't stop your employees from being able to access the files they need to work with.
You would have had a better shot at getting the word 'Insightful' next to your post if you had used the word 'permissions', but my reply kicks that idea down, too.
Not necessarily. A lot of companies are too concerned about lawsuits to say anything other than job title and start/end dates. They blacklist you at their company, of course, but there's not a lot of interest in informing other companies; just risk with no real upside, prudent policy generally shun references.
I don't know about the industry you're in but in my field there is a lot of personal networking going on. (That's why Facebook and LinkedIn actually are important to me.) If I sabotaged a workplace and any of my buddies found out about it, I would have a verrrrrrrry difficult time finding work because they'd speak up. I personally have a couple of names I know I'll speak up against over release of confidential data.
This may not be a factor in your field, but you should consider how every year more and more people get connected to social networking. The whole "what happened at the company stays at the company" philosophy is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.
I honestly don't understand. IT people need to be trusted with very important data. Each time one of these surveys come out they demonstrate that they can't be trusted with data.
I do wonder how that question was actually phrased. With a couple of exceptions, at every job I've worked at I've had data from that job end up at home. Maybe it's because I did a hard-drive backup just for my own peace of mind. Maybe it's because I used my laptop to do some work and never bothered to clear it off. Maybe it's because I worked from home. If somebody asked me if after a layoff I'd still have data, I'd probably have to answer 'yes'. And I'd probably hold on to it even though it'd more than likely never see the light of day.
I wouldn't really call that a breach of trust. I mean, from a 'letter of the law' sort of view, yeah I can see that being offensive. But at the same time lots of these jobs basically require you to blur the line between your personal machine and your work machine. They can't have tight data control and the productivity benefit of using all the resources at your disposal.
The low power ram accounts for 17% of the battery life.
Why wouldn't we pretend the SSD, thickness, and screen aren't valuable? They're all factors of the price! Or do you mean that you personally don't care?
Perhaps you didn't do the proper research before buying your phone
The Tab is a Tablet. :)
Perhaps you purchased a device with planned obsolescence built in.
Perhaps I have purchased a phone and never had a complaint about the battery life.
Oh, speaking of design flaws: The last three phones with replaceable batteries I had both broke at the battery compartment. With two of them, the battery would get knocked out just enough to break the power, and I wouldn't know the brick in my pocket wasn't going to ring when somebody called.
No, they're doubling the price for a thinner casing, better display, lower-powered-RAM, and a solid state hard drive.
Heh. In six months when Lenovo has a 220dpi screen suddenly it'll be a big deal around here.
His point was 'look before you judge'.
Wanting to have a large hard drive is not a mental defect. I cannot speak for him but the reason I have purchased MBP's in the past is I have *work* to do. I can easily chew up several gigs just working on one element of a project. I've had to go the external drive route before and besides risking somebody walking away with it and some sensitive data, it eats power and reduces mobility.
Seriously, on this site in particular, I cannot believe some wanker would come along and mod up your post. "Pffftbtbt, large hard drives are for loseres.
Ask customers of Acer about being seperated from their money.
You can't replace the battery in the Galaxy Tab, either, but nobody around here sharpened their pitchforks over it.
Oh, on an unrelated note: Battery life on the Tab is pretty good.
Tee hee giggle snort! Yeah, these guys would be muuuuch better off with one backup than two. Idiots!!
Pretty much counters your point, no?
I'm not really sure what I said that was so offensive. Am I wrong in thinking developers will follow the money?
The Atari had lots of "apps" (games). So many that it resulted in the Video Game Crash of 1983.
More apps != good apps.
More apps == harder to find the good apps.
Then Sony released the Playstation and inconsiderately stomped all over your point.
What's so hard to beleive? Apple had trained their customers to pay for apps.
So... you want him to come out..?
Actually, it is. You're not factoring in 'carry time'.