"...and change the combination on my luggage!!"
Headupassians don't typically care about those things...
Heh...it does fit the bill well, doesn't it?
The biggest problem, though, with all of this is that the dysfunctional pile (of sh.. if you must know...) sitting there has a massive network effect that you're going to have to counter. The network effect there with Android is going to work massively against you unless you can come out with something compelling. MeeGo could've been it...had they not been dysfunctional in their own way. Tizen...heh...I don't see that going well. I could be wrong. But I suspect I won't be.
As for cross-platform in the sense others talk to...it's a fail. WinCE had that in it's beginnings. Shortly thereafter, even though you could make for SH4, MIPS, and ARM, the pain and hassle of maintaining code for all three ended up with the software vendors working off a similar kind of network effect. Which class of arch was the most popular SoC's on the most popular WinCE devices? ARM. So you ended up with ARM only binaries for a *LOT* of the apps. At some point, it became more moot because everybody and his dog started doing nothing but ARM WinCE devices. This is why I think all these X86 Android devices popping up are silly. It's just Intel buying their way into relevance in this space. Much like the recent push for Edisons, etc. in the space that ARM devices like the BeagleBone Black reign.
If Intel can make something honestly compelling instead of the smoke and mirrors they've got going right now...great. Otherwise, you're fighting a network effect you're just not going to win playing against.
That's part of where the thinking about Tizen being all but a never-ran comes into play.
Tizen currently makes some small sense on something like a Smart TV (which could use Android, but could go with something else since you can live with "less apps") or a GPS system where it, too, doesn't "need" apps to make it worthwhile as an OS, UI, and target application.
But then, you could go with Android. The developer space is already there and the network effect for it is compelling.
In order to counter that network effect and have a chance, you'll need apps. LOTS of apps. Maybe not as many as Android or IOS have for them- but quite a few. Perhaps as many as half of what is in the Play market to start with.
I, personally, don't see that happening. Not with some HTML5 driven frameworks like Sailfish, FirefoxOS, or Tizen. You'll have to make it compelling enough to make a tectonic shift in the developer marketplace. Almost immediately. It's doable. Just not with this stuff we're talking about.
That's because Chipzilla's involved with it. They've been flailing around with all sorts of crap, muddying up the whole picture with MeeGo, Tizen, now Edison and Tesla. They want to have it all for themselves. An admirable business notion, but unaccomplishable in the manners unto which they've been fucking things up with in this space.
The only thing that's common between the two is the OS core...which has now drifted since Tizen's formation both on Sailfish and Tizen.
Sort of like Rural America is strategically ignored by the main players for Internet Access. Best play so far is Verizon...so long as you're nearby a primary corridor for LTE, that is. Otherwise, you get the dubious joy of Satellite Fraudband, 2/3G, or dialup. To put it in would be only as a loss leader play because the overall expense of putting in tower coverage versus payback unless you're talking a highway corridor is a bad picture in the bean counter sense of things. It's a dead loss. I very strongly suspect the same story for Mexico out around the area they're doing this...so, strategically, they ignore them.
They NEVER read TFA. Ever.
Either that or manipulate things via subterfuge...
And, if you've not figured out what I'm trying to tell you, my answer in your example would be, "Unless you want to spend two more million and spend 12 more months in development, and COMMIT to that- no."
The idiot notion of not being "negative" is fantasy that some crazy HR people came up with to whitewash over the real problems going on in a given company. You need to not just simply say, "no", but in the same vein, trying to not say no is stupid, crazy, etc. Sometimes things ***ARE*** really negative things and you can't wish/will them any other way.
Sadly, the JIT model is the only way to work in a mess like that...followed up with plans to vote with your feet.
The problem with that particular notion ("Yes, but you'd need to spend...") is that they're oftentimes NOT savvy enough to grok where you're coming from and they'll just hear the "yes" and make you try to jam 18+ months of dev effort into 6-8 months with the typical, classical, predictable failures, in spite of explanations why it just won't work with their notion. They hear "yes" followed by "wah...wah-wah...wah-wah-wah" like on Peanuts animated features when the adults talked. The "yes" means to them it's doable- the rest is irrelevant details as far as they're concerned (And, YES, I've dealt with the kind all too often and quite a bit in the last two and a half years, much to my chagrin...)
If "yes" is part of the answer when it probably ought to be a "no" or a qualified "no", then it's the wrong answer many times. Seriously. Any notions, from HR or otherwise that doesn't allow for a "no" answer from anyone other than executive management is a recipe for disaster.
They saw the cookie-cutter AS degree and passed on him. Not broad-based enough. Probably in a downturn.
Both items are deal-breakers when you're dealing with someone with the levels of experience that were available during the latter condition. (Why get a fresh AS grad, when you can get an SME for roughly the same price? Mainly because the SME's desperate...)
Yeah, you're technically old-school. You were taught a discipline- which, in truth, is little different than learning a trade, to be bluntly honest.
Colleges have lost their way...or worse, they've taken to strip-mining students for all the cash they can bleed from them and the government through student loans.
How many of them are doing embedded Linux and Android projects- and when they weren't, how many of them were using ThreadX, VxWorks, pSOS, Lynx, QNX, etc.?
If you needed to know VS, you were working in the wrong circles. I didn't need to know VS even though it was one of the bigger deals for doing Windows development- I knew how to code C++ and understood and used ATL, MFC, etc. Which, by the way, is the way everyone should've framed it. Not, "do you do VS"?