There is a lot of truth to that statement. It was the cheaper consumer models that were affected. Retail profit margins are so thin that manufacturers and retailers make up for it with preloaded crapware.
Lenovo's business products were not affected by this as these aren't usually preloaded with crap. The same goes for other manufactures too. Dell and HP both offer cheap crapware infested models, along with pricier crap free business models.
You do get what you pay for.
The last consumer-grade Dell PC I bought came with a restore disk that was just a plain vanilla Windows 7 image. It didn't even have drivers. So, voila, perform a clean install right out of the box, install the drivers (from the included driver disks), and you've got a crapware-free Windows. (Of course, it's still on a consumer-grade Dell laptop, and that's a little harder to remedy. But like you say, you get what you pay for.)
Apps are not games. I get the sneaking feeling that this is just a ruse to get people excited about W10 development. If you're expecting to build your own A/AA/AAA title on XB1 - I'd continue holding your money/breath. This could easily be a repeat of XNA.
Personally, I have no intention of even *touching* an XB1 unless they open-up *native* development. (That means a full directx sdk, kinect,
Because they are deliberately tricking people into using the online account.
Yeah, pretty much, from what I've seen of Windows 8.
It really depends on the individual role, the team as a whole, and the individual being hired. I shouldn't have used numbers as people are entirely too hung up on it.
Really? Do you know how many talented developers who are completely and utterly 'dysfunctional' themselves and cause irrevocable damage to the team and its work output? It's not something I enjoy dealing with as much as helping people continue to grow and learn.
Depending on what need I'm trying to fill, I hire 90% for culture fit and 10% for technical ability. Most often, people can learn to improve their technical ability, especially b/c there is very rarely any single individual who can fill an open req 100%. That said, what I have found cannot be learned as well, is how to fit into an organization's culture.
Broad experience is great and I wholly support companies which are looking to add resources who possess such knowledge; however, broad experience can come with the price of not having enough targeted knowledge to bring deep-dive specifics to the mix.
The real question you should be asking is whether they can figure it out on their own if tasked with finding a solution to the problem. I guarantee you that most of those you have cast aside due to their lack of public-key cryptography knowledge would be able to do so while bringing you the specific knowledge you need straight out of their heads.
Honestly, if you interviewed me and I didn't know the answer to some mostly irrelevant question and told me that's why I didn't get the job, I would thank you for not hiring me to work with someone who doesn't know enough about being a hiring manager to do his job effectively.
benifits... here come the nazis...
Kudos for taking a statement out of context so knowingly - making it sound as if I was implying that Intel has done something wrong. (Learn how to read, or at least make a valid point)
Minorities (women, or non-Caucasian males, doesn't really matter) aren't traditionally considered on equal footing. It's not some new concept. But you know that already, don't you?
"passed up for a century" meaning that, even when qualified - blacks have quite famous been "last hired, first fired" from WWII until the well after the civil rights movement. None of those groups have pay equality today. That concentration of wealth and jobs aren't some simple line-item. That represents education, and voting power (especially today).
To make myself clear:
I never said "reverse discrimination" is the right thing. But acting like the status-quo is cool [because it benifits you] pisses me off.
I understand what you're saying, and I'm not saying you're wrong. (At an objective level, you're completely right)
But I can't completely agree with your nay-saying as a valid solution to a problem that repeats itself over and over in america: A group of people rigs the game to the where where they have a stranglehold, to the detriment of ALL others. That same group (or their progeny) then cries that those not-so-fairly won advantages shouldn't be taken away for the sake of the industry
Its smacks of hypocrisy, and downright disrespect for every group but your own. (IMO.)
Passing up perfectly qualified candidates in order to appease a quota.
Who said anything about hiring/helping someone unqualified? There are plenty of qualified candidates who aren't white males, who have been "passed up" for a century, and worked twice as hard to even get to that point. Get off your horse.
Does this apply to tablets/data-only devices as well?
I have a PS Vita 3G that's just *dying* to get on a network that isn't AT&T.
Answer - There is no section that says that. It's true that some Mormons once slaughtered a group of passing settlers. It was unequivocally a bad thing to do. It can be slightly better understood (but not excused) by understanding the circumstances. Mormons were quite paranoid of outsiders, since they and their families had been driven out of several cities, raped, and murdered. There was hysteria about Johnston's Army coming into the territory, conquering it, and again raping and murdering people (this was right in the middle of the "Utah War"). In the midst of that hysteria, one group of people went completely nuts and did some horrible, inexcusable things. At first, they told Brigham Young that Indians did it, and Brigham (probably reluctant to believe that some of his own people could do something so heinous), believed them. A local grand jury also failed to indict, again probably reluctant to believe that some of their own could do something so heinous. Years later, federal prosecutors came in, and when it became clear that John Lee and his friends had in fact been responsible, the church excommunicated them (which is the worst penalty a church can or should be able to levy). Years later, Lee was convicted by an all-Mormon jury and shot, and Brigham Young opined that Lee got less than he deserved. There have been some efforts to implicate Brigham Young as a co-conspirator, but it takes a lot of winking at the actual evidence to get there. Many people believe that he made mistakes in how he handled the situation, which is a more supportable proposition.
Bringing up facts about Mormons is fine. But if you're going to do it, learn the whole story. Don't just parrot some anti-Mormon sound bite you once heard from somebody.
"Engineering without management is art." -- Jeff Johnson
