Yes, the WEBSITE does. The readers, well, your mileage WILL vary. I see Apple Fanboys, Microsoft Fanboys and Linux Fanboys who refuse to accept smart and valid criticism. Often it's treated like a personal attack. And it is responded to as such, using far less smart and valid criticism.
I wasn't intending to refer to what is essentially (as you pointed out), a lateral move, but I see that I could have done much better in framing my question. I was attempting to refer to the issue of a whole new skill set needing to be acquired in order to provide value to the company in a new role.
For example, I haven't seen a majority of sys admins who can successfully transition from Tech Support to Developer in a short enough period of time with enough skill as a developer to qualify as "Talented" in software development. There's a difference between the two skill sets/ways of thinking that are not necessarily trainable. If they were, then I would expect good software developers to be plentiful and demand much lower salaries. They honestly don't appear to be. I've done both jobs, and I personally don't think I use the same skills in both tasks.
I'll rephrase the question, with perhaps a more apropos (to my point) example:
* Should companies retain employees who are incapable of transitioning from their previous job (let's say Phone Support for a discontinued product) to a new role (say Enterprise Linux Administration) where the current need is?
In my experience, good in one IT role doesn't mean good in ANY IT role.
Why hypocrites?
A shortage of talent AND layoffs can actually coexist within the same company.
If you need Linux Developers and you've just dropped your unsuccessful Mac or Windows product and laid off the entire devision, how does that suddenly add to the pool of Linux Developers?
The folks being laid off are picked over for talent worth retaining in light of current company needs. The ones whose jobs are eliminated but are not sufficiently skilled to be deployed elsewhere within the company are let go.
My questions are:
* Should companies continue to make products no one wants in order to avoid layoffs?
* Should they retain employees who used to support Windows but cannot support Linux (or vice versa) and call them Talented on the new platform?
Your take on the intent of the article might be a little clearer if you RTFA, or if you RTFA that article points to. Then maybe you might be able to make an informed statement about the actual contents of said articles.
Not holding my breath here, though.
Lots of companies decline work all the time. Only a handful of companies seem to consistently accept/complete the projects that make a difference.
Is yours one of them? If so, you certainly have a defensible position, but if your company does competent, middle-of-the-road work, THAT doesn't qualify as magic, at least in my book.
Magic: Getting people to buy your product in the face of very vocal criticism and general name-calling of both your company and your customers. Consistently. It's amazing to me that with all of the vitriol spewed at Apple, among others, they are still successful.
Doesn't the Fourth Amendment specifically deal with illegal search and seizure, or am I reading this wrong?
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
"The signers of the Declaration of Independence have asked that their names be redacted for fear of harassment by citizens of the British Empire"
Yeah, that would work...
I see a lot of comments indicating that the color is not right on glossy displays.
Is there any reason that color calibrators such as Spyder would not work on a glossy display?
Slashdot Mirror
"Slashdot accepts smart and valid criticism"
Yes, the WEBSITE does. The readers, well, your mileage WILL vary. I see Apple Fanboys, Microsoft Fanboys and Linux Fanboys who refuse to accept smart and valid criticism. Often it's treated like a personal attack. And it is responded to as such, using far less smart and valid criticism.
I just thought I should point that out.
I wasn't intending to refer to what is essentially (as you pointed out), a lateral move, but I see that I could have done much better in framing my question. I was attempting to refer to the issue of a whole new skill set needing to be acquired in order to provide value to the company in a new role.
For example, I haven't seen a majority of sys admins who can successfully transition from Tech Support to Developer in a short enough period of time with enough skill as a developer to qualify as "Talented" in software development. There's a difference between the two skill sets/ways of thinking that are not necessarily trainable. If they were, then I would expect good software developers to be plentiful and demand much lower salaries. They honestly don't appear to be. I've done both jobs, and I personally don't think I use the same skills in both tasks.
I'll rephrase the question, with perhaps a more apropos (to my point) example:
* Should companies retain employees who are incapable of transitioning from their previous job (let's say Phone Support for a discontinued product) to a new role (say Enterprise Linux Administration) where the current need is?
In my experience, good in one IT role doesn't mean good in ANY IT role.
- Wiz
Why hypocrites? A shortage of talent AND layoffs can actually coexist within the same company. If you need Linux Developers and you've just dropped your unsuccessful Mac or Windows product and laid off the entire devision, how does that suddenly add to the pool of Linux Developers? The folks being laid off are picked over for talent worth retaining in light of current company needs. The ones whose jobs are eliminated but are not sufficiently skilled to be deployed elsewhere within the company are let go.
My questions are:
* Should companies continue to make products no one wants in order to avoid layoffs?
* Should they retain employees who used to support Windows but cannot support Linux (or vice versa) and call them Talented on the new platform?
Thanks,
- Wiz
Total Cost of Ownership. It's why I use Apple gear. Your mileage may vary, but mine does not.
Your take on the intent of the article might be a little clearer if you RTFA, or if you RTFA that article points to. Then maybe you might be able to make an informed statement about the actual contents of said articles. Not holding my breath here, though.
Lots of companies decline work all the time. Only a handful of companies seem to consistently accept/complete the projects that make a difference. Is yours one of them? If so, you certainly have a defensible position, but if your company does competent, middle-of-the-road work, THAT doesn't qualify as magic, at least in my book. Magic: Getting people to buy your product in the face of very vocal criticism and general name-calling of both your company and your customers. Consistently. It's amazing to me that with all of the vitriol spewed at Apple, among others, they are still successful.
Doesn't the Fourth Amendment specifically deal with illegal search and seizure, or am I reading this wrong? "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
"The signers of the Declaration of Independence have asked that their names be redacted for fear of harassment by citizens of the British Empire" Yeah, that would work...
He heads up a couple of semi-successful businesses, Apple, Inc and Pixar. I wonder if Google would consider him qualified?
I see a lot of comments indicating that the color is not right on glossy displays. Is there any reason that color calibrators such as Spyder would not work on a glossy display?