Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
True. And it's not that people prefer MSO over OpenOffice, it's just that they need to be able to interact with people using Office. And opening a Word document on OpenOffice usually ends up like a big mess. Same for Powerpoint or Excel. Interchangeability is just a mess right now.
Sure, interoperability is an issue for some people, but some of us do prefer MSO over OO. Yeah, I really wish we still had the menubar rather than the ribbon, but if I'm typing anything substantial, I really want MSWord because I can't find anything in OO (that's a bit of a training issue, but I really do have trouble finding options/commands in OO to the point that OO is very frustrating for me).
An even bigger issue for me is that only MSO has OneNote (or an equivalent). I don't care at all about Outlook because I use Thunderbird, and only a little about Powerpoint and Excel (my needs for these 2 tools is so limited OO works just fine). Until OO gets an equivalent to OneNote, only MSO can really meet my needs.
I think the lines need to be built by and maintained by one company or by the municipality and the service provided by competition.
I totally agree with you. Of course, that means that we start to treat broadband like a utility and not a private business, which is fine by me.
There are good and bad points to excluding customers. It's ridiculous to run a 20 mile fiber to one person's house or even a group of five or six houses and charge them the same as everyone else. If they want cable- they should live with the rest of civilization.
I think you need to think that thru a little more. Going by that logic, you're saying that farmers (who grow your food) and others who just like small town life don't deserve high-speed internet. I'm not sure what word I want to apply to that, but you don't come out looking so nice there.
Now, if you want to say that those who live further out will need to pay a bit more because of their situation, I think most of us could agree to that. Of course, with the advent of putting access points on water towers and other high places and then a receiver/transmitter dish on the person's house so that lines don't have to be run to individual houses, even those of us not in "the big city" can get better speeds at mostly reasonable prices.
Also, software is one of those things that moves very fast and comes about by building on the works of others. If you start patents for software, you'll stiffle and kill the software industry. We can't wait 28 years for some idea that literally thousands of us could come up with to be freely usable. It would also be very hard to enforce that.
What the article is try to get banned is "long-range hypersonic missles", or if you prefer, the old ICBMs going a lot faster. If you could make a very small nuke and stick it in one of the existing missle cases; you could have a pretty awesome weapon if short distances are all you need (say in the 80-100 mile range from what I've read, definitely far enough the pilot wouldn't have to worry about getting caught in it). It'd be pretty easy to hit any coastal city from international air space that way.
I don't have a lot of patience with the profession since it's built on a fatally flawed analogy and all software architects ever do is waste and overhead from a lean perspective.
It *sounds* like you've never worked on a large project then. Fine, fire the architects, but you're still going to need someone to do their job, no matter if you call them the team lead or something else. There needs to be a *technical* person at the top who says "we're marching that way" and here's some stuff we need to keep in mind and do. Some technical person who can push back to the product owner when it's needed and explain in technical gory details when required. That's not the project manager because they're not technical enough; or that's been true for all the projects I've ever worked on.
You need someone to can look ahead at the items coming and notice that there are some common things needed, and that if you spend some time up front to fix (a framework, a subsystem, whatever) that it will be cheaper and faster to do that way than to let small bits of code be written and then refactored a hundred times as the sprints slowly come in.
I'm sorry you don't like the construction analogy, but it's very true that the cheapest time to change a building is when you're still at the blueprint stage before it's built
Sure, most product owners owners don't really know where they want to end up, but some things are well known and when you have that knowledge you should use it as soon as possible, no matter what you want to call the roles or the results. Protocols, APIs, security, data models and databases, etc are all things that should be planned as much as possible, not organically grown and refactored. Who does that planning?
My day job right now is dealing with code that had very little upfront planning, very Agile'ish, and the system is a nightmare at times. I'll admit that the source of the problem may be that the devs before me never came back and refactored and cleaned up, but a little more planning would have made much of that unnecessary. That's what an architect brings to the table: some overall planning and technical sense.
OTOH, do we developers want that? Look at the controversy surrounding systemd, directly developed by RH. If that's a sample of what they do, I'm not so keen for their solutions.
Second, I hope he doesn't mean it, but it sounds like Cook want to be more diverse to look more politically correct. If I were a stock holder, I'd be upset. I wouldn't want him be "diverse" so he can look good; I'd want him to hire the best qualified people in a completely "blind" way. If that means 90% are male, or 80% white, or 85% female, or whatever the numbers work out to be because those were the best people to get the job done, then so be it. If the PC-crowd doesn't like it, then they need to encourage more minorities to get the required education and get qualified.
However, I really Really REALLY hope they've found a way for you to install KDE and not have to have akonadi or nepomunk installed on my system. For the longest time, they've been force installed because of dependencies and I don't want them on my machine because I never use them and their daemons just suck up resources. Seems like there was something else like this, maybe amarok, but I'm having a hard time remembering. I like KDE in general, but I don't want all of it.