It's customary to refer to Concorde as "Concorde."
As long as we're being pedantic...
customary Adjective: According to the customs or usual practices associated with a particular society, place, or set of circumstances. According to a person's habitual practice.
Every time I've heard of the Concorde, it has been said as "the Concorde" in every article I've seen.
It might be correct to call it "Concorde", but I don't think the word customary means what you think it means.
a single minded person who's job is their hobby and also their life
Hobby, yes. Life, no.
If you're going to work in a job, ANY job, it should be something you are passionate about. Musicians that don't like music usually suck. Same goes with construction workers that don't like to build things.
Technology shouldn't be your life, but it should be your passion if you're going to spend 8+ hours a day working with it. If you went to school for it and paid all of that money for it, but you're not even tried it, you're taking a HUGE gamble with your life. There is a good chance you could end up hating what you chose to do for a living. You're free to make that gamble, but I'm not going to be the one to bet on you by hiring you.
If you have coursework that did something practical for the job I'm hiring for, great! That's exactly what I'm talking about.
However, if you just did a bunch of theory-type work that has no practical purpose, then you wasted your time and money.
40-50 hours a week is what you're going to work in your career, too. Later, you're likely to have a spouse and kids. You have the extra time while in school to *DO* something with that education you're getting.
If you can't produce something that you did outside of school (created software that did X, built network to do Y), then you're not the kind of person that is going to do great work once on the job.
I've been in the position of hiring, and degrees and accreditation are meaningless to me. Show me what you have done, for-profit or not.
If you spent the last 4 years of your life sitting in a classroom, getting drunk on Thursday-Saturday night, but didn't take the time to actually build something with the education you gained, chances are you're going to waste your workday by forming meetings, chatting with coworkers, and watching them do all of the work.
On the other end, with 20 years of IT work, I've had other companies refuse to even accept my resume when I tell them I don't have a 4-year degree. It is helpful, though, because I'd likely quit if surrounded by people like that.
I dropped out not because of bad grades, but because I was falling behind in the work I wanted to do (networking) during the school year, and then catching up while working a summer job related to my field. It only took two summers of that until I realized that it was pretty fucking stupid to PAY to fall behind for 8 months of the year and only GET PAID 3 months while actually learning.
I don't hold it against you if the best way for you to learn was through extra school. However, if all you have to show for your education is a piece of paper, get lost.
On a related note, this is why I really think a formal guild should exist for IT workers. NOT collective bargaining, but a system where an apprentice learns under a master in that field. The master vouches for the abilities of the apprentice, and after a few times of different masters vouching for them, they become a journeyman.
As someone hiring, it wouldn't take long to know that Master X's word was solid, and Master Y often approved jack-offs, so the system can be self-correcting.
I'm sick of that presumption. The point of education SHOULD be to become educated. Then, you use that education to do X work better than others without that education.
Instead, we treat it like a membership card into business. I fail to understand why so many MBAs hate unions when they refuse to hire someone without an MBA, thus creating their own union.
If you're talking about the lock, you're talking about Microsoft ARM devices, not desktop devices. Microsoft has no monopoly there, and is FAR behind Apple in that market.
The EPA already attempts to do this using what has been termed the "designated felon".
The idea is that if there are severe environmental damages, the company has to have someone designated as the person that will do jail time. The idea is that this person is in charge of setting and enforcing the policies that will keep her out of jail. It even allows someone that violates the policies to be the one that serves jail time. In other words, the DF says "you must do this", and if you ignore that, you do the time.
However, this isn't enforced as much as it should be, and I'm not aware of any other use of this idea outside EPA regulations.
1. Full-screen for a launcher. I use more than one program at a time, each in a WINDOW, on my multi-monitor computer. I hate having everything I'm working on or watching covered over by a big-ass set of tiles just because I'm launching another program. There is no speed improvement here. 2. Window key, type part of my program, enter. This is my most frequent way to launch anything on Win7. This does not work right in Win8, as you pointed out.
Both of those are disruptive enough that I can't see Win8's launcher as a step forward, but a step backward. This is the first version of Windows that I've felt that way.
I also have a solution for the full-screen issue: Make it an option to have Metro as the background. With actual live tiles, this would a huge improvement. When I minimize all of my apps (Windows+D), I would see the current updates in all of my live tiles, and could launch them from there.
Why is it that I can think of all of this & I'm just a network engineer? WTF is going on in Redmond?
and a few old stick-in-mud types insisted on using them
The funny thing is, I always laughed at them for that. I have felt that every UI update Windows had was a gradual improvement over the old one, and I couldn't see using the old.
Metro was the first time I had to force myself to use it, and I did force it for 2 months. I refused to install the old start menu, because I didn't want to be stuck-in-mud. Turns out, either I'm just too old now, or Metro is just stupid on a PC.
I addressed this in another post, but to sum it up:
1. Delays in Longhorn development caused driver makers to not have enough time to make drivers for day 1 of Vista 2. From day 1 to SP1, there were MANY computers that had bad driver issues. Some, designed for Vista (like my laptop), worked great. Others were unusable. 3. After SP1, most OEMs had decent support, but the bad times before that point make Vista a bad word in IT. 4. Windows 7 came out with minor upgrades from Vista, but its biggest feature was not being called Vista. People upgraded, saw that the drivers worked, and liked it. Had they upgraded at Vista SP1, they would have been just as happy.
Maybe it isn't. User perception IS their problem, and a bad driver experience causes users to blame the OS.
I also had Vista during that window, and it worked great on my Dell laptop. By SP1, most issues were resolved by the OEMs.
Still, people didn't want to touch the OS because of the bad day 1 issues with driver support. Windows 7's best improvement over Vista was not being called Vista, so people actually gave it a shot.
Best idea I saw was in the comments section of a MS blog post. Not an exact quote, but it was something like:
1. Put a Control Panel option in to disable Metro launcher, restoring start button menu. 2. Set Metro to be default ON when no mouse is detected. If a mouse is detected, set it to default OFF. 3. Allow Metro windows to be re-sized when a mouse is detected. (Metro apps could still be launched from start menu).
If they just did those three things, I'd be excited to get Win8.
I have a Windows Phone, and I do like the Metro interface there. I equally hate it on my laptop and desktop.
Shitty driver support. This is a 50/50 split between the vendors being lazy and Microsoft being unpredictable.
MS made some HUGE changes between not only betas, but release candidates on Vista. Many OEMs and 3rd-party vendors decided to wait until it shipped (or until first service pack) until they updated their drivers. Then, some of them decided "Screw it, you can buy our new product with Vista drivers, but we're not touching the old stuff". *I'm looking at you, Logitech.*
If you had a computer that had proper Vista drivers, then everything was completely stable. However, Vista had the worst driver support that I've ever seen because of the drastic driver model change.
So, was the OS itself unstable? No. However, Microsoft made it hard on the people that actually wrote the drivers, so as far as the end user was concerned, it sucked.
The really sad part about Win8 is Metro. There is a LOT to like about the underlying OS (password unmask, much better taskmanager, and many other small improvements), and I have no reason to think that the OS itself will be unstable like ME or Vista.
If Microsoft would fix Metro on the desktop (It may be fine for tablets and phones), Win8 would be something I would like. However, as it currently stands, I won't "upgrade" until I have a good, stable way to disable Metro and use the other features of the OS.
I own a Windows phone, and I got it thinking "This is pretty close to what I want, I'll hang on to see if WP 8 is good enough". After this crap rendering my months-old phone obsolete, I'm going back to Apple. At least my old 3 GS still can run the current version of iOS.
I find it funny that Nokia's ad campaign was based on "The smartphone beta test is over". Too bad they didn't say that it was their new line of phones that were the beta!!
That doesn't come for free. Large projects like this might solve the problem, but the cost is high for something that shouldn't be their job to begin with.
The answer isn't pinning this on women, the answer is expecting men to step up as well.
In some countries, men get almost or the same amount of leave to care for a newborn.
If they did it this way, I could see many companies that have young women AND men who take anywhere from 2-3 days a week to 2 weeks at a time to take shifts caring for their newborn.
I would have *LOVED* the chance to take care of my children at that age. Even though I contributed the same amount of genetic material as my wife, because I have a penis, my country (USA) doesn't think I should be able to spend the same amount of time with my newborns.
Fix this, and the whole issue you illustrated (very well, I might add) goes away.
Remember "chat"? Remember when everybody had their own little IM service?
Remember? We're still there. What address do I give you exactly so you can chat with me? There is still the disclaimer "On XX service" attached to anything I'd exchange with you.
Email works regardless if I'm on Notes and you're on Pine and we CC someone on Exchange, without any notion of what the back end or client is. Chat still isn't there.
The person who died already paid the taxes, and his wish is to leave the money to whoever he pleases, but not the government, but the government comes in and says: you can't do so. We taxed you while you were alive and we'll tax your wealth once you are dead too for good measure, just to remind everybody who's the boss.
Daddy WarBucks has $10,000,000 in a bank account. I do a ton of construction and computer work for him with a $5,000,000 bill on it.
At the same time my bill is paid, WarBucks dies. His son, JR, gets the remaining $5,000,000.
Now, me and JR just got $5mm from WarBucks. For some reason, you claim that while I need to pay taxes on my $5mm for WORK I did, JR shouldn't have to pay a dime in taxes for money he got while sucking air.
WarBucks is dead. No one is taxing HIM. This is a debate over what happens to the money that is handed to someone else.
I contend that the money EARNED BY WORK is more sacred than money received as a gift. I have more of a right to that money.
However, I would find it acceptable if we were both taxed the same, since JR's dad died and all. Dead dad or not, he shouldn't pay less taxes than I have to pay.
Slashdot Mirror
It's customary to refer to Concorde as "Concorde."
As long as we're being pedantic...
customary
Adjective:
According to the customs or usual practices associated with a particular society, place, or set of circumstances.
According to a person's habitual practice.
Every time I've heard of the Concorde, it has been said as "the Concorde" in every article I've seen.
It might be correct to call it "Concorde", but I don't think the word customary means what you think it means.
Carry on...
a single minded person who's job is their hobby and also their life
Hobby, yes. Life, no.
If you're going to work in a job, ANY job, it should be something you are passionate about. Musicians that don't like music usually suck. Same goes with construction workers that don't like to build things.
Technology shouldn't be your life, but it should be your passion if you're going to spend 8+ hours a day working with it. If you went to school for it and paid all of that money for it, but you're not even tried it, you're taking a HUGE gamble with your life. There is a good chance you could end up hating what you chose to do for a living. You're free to make that gamble, but I'm not going to be the one to bet on you by hiring you.
If you have coursework that did something practical for the job I'm hiring for, great! That's exactly what I'm talking about.
However, if you just did a bunch of theory-type work that has no practical purpose, then you wasted your time and money.
40-50 hours a week is what you're going to work in your career, too. Later, you're likely to have a spouse and kids. You have the extra time while in school to *DO* something with that education you're getting.
If you can't produce something that you did outside of school (created software that did X, built network to do Y), then you're not the kind of person that is going to do great work once on the job.
I've been in the position of hiring, and degrees and accreditation are meaningless to me. Show me what you have done, for-profit or not.
If you spent the last 4 years of your life sitting in a classroom, getting drunk on Thursday-Saturday night, but didn't take the time to actually build something with the education you gained, chances are you're going to waste your workday by forming meetings, chatting with coworkers, and watching them do all of the work.
On the other end, with 20 years of IT work, I've had other companies refuse to even accept my resume when I tell them I don't have a 4-year degree. It is helpful, though, because I'd likely quit if surrounded by people like that.
I dropped out not because of bad grades, but because I was falling behind in the work I wanted to do (networking) during the school year, and then catching up while working a summer job related to my field. It only took two summers of that until I realized that it was pretty fucking stupid to PAY to fall behind for 8 months of the year and only GET PAID 3 months while actually learning.
I don't hold it against you if the best way for you to learn was through extra school. However, if all you have to show for your education is a piece of paper, get lost.
On a related note, this is why I really think a formal guild should exist for IT workers. NOT collective bargaining, but a system where an apprentice learns under a master in that field. The master vouches for the abilities of the apprentice, and after a few times of different masters vouching for them, they become a journeyman.
As someone hiring, it wouldn't take long to know that Master X's word was solid, and Master Y often approved jack-offs, so the system can be self-correcting.
I'm sick of that presumption. The point of education SHOULD be to become educated. Then, you use that education to do X work better than others without that education.
Instead, we treat it like a membership card into business. I fail to understand why so many MBAs hate unions when they refuse to hire someone without an MBA, thus creating their own union.
If you're talking about the lock, you're talking about Microsoft ARM devices, not desktop devices. Microsoft has no monopoly there, and is FAR behind Apple in that market.
And, http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2985663&cid=40677977
Re-read my post. I said "iOS", not OSX.
Microsoft is only doing the boot lock on devices that compete squarely with Apple (tablet and phone), not on the desktop.
Tell me again how Apple allows me to run my own OS on the iPhone or iPad?
Sure, go after Apple's iOS boot loader lock first, since they have several times the number of devices as Microsoft that are affected by a lock.
The EPA already attempts to do this using what has been termed the "designated felon".
The idea is that if there are severe environmental damages, the company has to have someone designated as the person that will do jail time. The idea is that this person is in charge of setting and enforcing the policies that will keep her out of jail.
It even allows someone that violates the policies to be the one that serves jail time. In other words, the DF says "you must do this", and if you ignore that, you do the time.
However, this isn't enforced as much as it should be, and I'm not aware of any other use of this idea outside EPA regulations.
My complaints:
1. Full-screen for a launcher. I use more than one program at a time, each in a WINDOW, on my multi-monitor computer. I hate having everything I'm working on or watching covered over by a big-ass set of tiles just because I'm launching another program. There is no speed improvement here.
2. Window key, type part of my program, enter. This is my most frequent way to launch anything on Win7. This does not work right in Win8, as you pointed out.
Both of those are disruptive enough that I can't see Win8's launcher as a step forward, but a step backward. This is the first version of Windows that I've felt that way.
I also have a solution for the full-screen issue: Make it an option to have Metro as the background. With actual live tiles, this would a huge improvement. When I minimize all of my apps (Windows+D), I would see the current updates in all of my live tiles, and could launch them from there.
Why is it that I can think of all of this & I'm just a network engineer? WTF is going on in Redmond?
and a few old stick-in-mud types insisted on using them
The funny thing is, I always laughed at them for that. I have felt that every UI update Windows had was a gradual improvement over the old one, and I couldn't see using the old.
Metro was the first time I had to force myself to use it, and I did force it for 2 months. I refused to install the old start menu, because I didn't want to be stuck-in-mud. Turns out, either I'm just too old now, or Metro is just stupid on a PC.
I addressed this in another post, but to sum it up:
1. Delays in Longhorn development caused driver makers to not have enough time to make drivers for day 1 of Vista
2. From day 1 to SP1, there were MANY computers that had bad driver issues. Some, designed for Vista (like my laptop), worked great. Others were unusable.
3. After SP1, most OEMs had decent support, but the bad times before that point make Vista a bad word in IT.
4. Windows 7 came out with minor upgrades from Vista, but its biggest feature was not being called Vista. People upgraded, saw that the drivers worked, and liked it. Had they upgraded at Vista SP1, they would have been just as happy.
Shitty driver support isn't Microsoft's problem.
Maybe it isn't. User perception IS their problem, and a bad driver experience causes users to blame the OS.
I also had Vista during that window, and it worked great on my Dell laptop. By SP1, most issues were resolved by the OEMs.
Still, people didn't want to touch the OS because of the bad day 1 issues with driver support. Windows 7's best improvement over Vista was not being called Vista, so people actually gave it a shot.
Best idea I saw was in the comments section of a MS blog post.
Not an exact quote, but it was something like:
1. Put a Control Panel option in to disable Metro launcher, restoring start button menu.
2. Set Metro to be default ON when no mouse is detected. If a mouse is detected, set it to default OFF.
3. Allow Metro windows to be re-sized when a mouse is detected. (Metro apps could still be launched from start menu).
If they just did those three things, I'd be excited to get Win8.
I have a Windows Phone, and I do like the Metro interface there. I equally hate it on my laptop and desktop.
That's also why I didn't object to Bob being mentioned, just ME and Vista. :)
Shitty driver support. This is a 50/50 split between the vendors being lazy and Microsoft being unpredictable.
MS made some HUGE changes between not only betas, but release candidates on Vista. Many OEMs and 3rd-party vendors decided to wait until it shipped (or until first service pack) until they updated their drivers. Then, some of them decided "Screw it, you can buy our new product with Vista drivers, but we're not touching the old stuff". *I'm looking at you, Logitech.*
If you had a computer that had proper Vista drivers, then everything was completely stable. However, Vista had the worst driver support that I've ever seen because of the drastic driver model change.
So, was the OS itself unstable? No. However, Microsoft made it hard on the people that actually wrote the drivers, so as far as the end user was concerned, it sucked.
My point is that comparing a poorly designed UI to an unstable OS isn't a comparison at all.
I can use a shitty UI if I have to, but a great UI on an unstable OS is worthless to me.
Comparing Win8 to ME or Vista is unfair to Win8.
The really sad part about Win8 is Metro. There is a LOT to like about the underlying OS (password unmask, much better taskmanager, and many other small improvements), and I have no reason to think that the OS itself will be unstable like ME or Vista.
If Microsoft would fix Metro on the desktop (It may be fine for tablets and phones), Win8 would be something I would like. However, as it currently stands, I won't "upgrade" until I have a good, stable way to disable Metro and use the other features of the OS.
I own a Windows phone, and I got it thinking "This is pretty close to what I want, I'll hang on to see if WP 8 is good enough". After this crap rendering my months-old phone obsolete, I'm going back to Apple. At least my old 3 GS still can run the current version of iOS.
I find it funny that Nokia's ad campaign was based on "The smartphone beta test is over". Too bad they didn't say that it was their new line of phones that were the beta!!
Any really large organization can automate this
That doesn't come for free. Large projects like this might solve the problem, but the cost is high for something that shouldn't be their job to begin with.
It would be akin to patenting the fucking brick.
THAT IS AN AWESOME IDEA!
*runs to patent brick*
Fuuuuuuuu: http://www.google.com/patents/US1959816
The answer isn't pinning this on women, the answer is expecting men to step up as well.
In some countries, men get almost or the same amount of leave to care for a newborn.
If they did it this way, I could see many companies that have young women AND men who take anywhere from 2-3 days a week to 2 weeks at a time to take shifts caring for their newborn.
I would have *LOVED* the chance to take care of my children at that age. Even though I contributed the same amount of genetic material as my wife, because I have a penis, my country (USA) doesn't think I should be able to spend the same amount of time with my newborns.
Fix this, and the whole issue you illustrated (very well, I might add) goes away.
Remember "chat"? Remember when everybody had their own little IM service?
Remember? We're still there. What address do I give you exactly so you can chat with me? There is still the disclaimer "On XX service" attached to anything I'd exchange with you.
Email works regardless if I'm on Notes and you're on Pine and we CC someone on Exchange, without any notion of what the back end or client is. Chat still isn't there.
The person who died already paid the taxes, and his wish is to leave the money to whoever he pleases, but not the government, but the government comes in and says: you can't do so. We taxed you while you were alive and we'll tax your wealth once you are dead too for good measure, just to remind everybody who's the boss.
Daddy WarBucks has $10,000,000 in a bank account. I do a ton of construction and computer work for him with a $5,000,000 bill on it.
At the same time my bill is paid, WarBucks dies. His son, JR, gets the remaining $5,000,000.
Now, me and JR just got $5mm from WarBucks. For some reason, you claim that while I need to pay taxes on my $5mm for WORK I did, JR shouldn't have to pay a dime in taxes for money he got while sucking air.
WarBucks is dead. No one is taxing HIM. This is a debate over what happens to the money that is handed to someone else.
I contend that the money EARNED BY WORK is more sacred than money received as a gift. I have more of a right to that money.
However, I would find it acceptable if we were both taxed the same, since JR's dad died and all. Dead dad or not, he shouldn't pay less taxes than I have to pay.
Therefore, it is a scarce resource.
Are you honestly saying that a provider had to add resources to a cell tower solely to add SMS capacity, not data or voice?