Excellent, I'll have to check that out.
Excellent, I'll have to check that out.
That is terrible, I've been an OIM consultant for a decade and I've never once run across an implementation that did not use custom connectors (in several cases, exclusively custom connectors).
The out of box connectors are amateurish at best.
Sailpoint has probably the best UI and access certification system around. Unfortunately their provisioning engine is a rebranded BMC Control-SA as I understand it. If that is still the case, no thank you
ForgeRock IDM or MidPoint are cheaper (read: open source) than both. But neither have quite the feature set yet.
I'm an implementer of OIM (10 years now). OIM is an excellent framework for a provisioning tool, but the connectors are terrible (fortunately easy to build your own against the API) and the UI is useless. The most successful OIM implementations I've come across (or built) have been ones that used a custom UI and/or just made everything scriptable. The API is really the saving grace of OIM. It's confusing, but it is powerful.
Sadly, I'm watching the product spiral downhill as of the last several versions.
So you'd like to see the F-35 trying to mow down Ruskie tank columns trying to break through the Fulda Gap after air superiority had been achieved? That was the environment that the A-10 was designed to handle. The A-10 was designed to be a flying tank because it was meant to fly low and take enemy AA fire. Its air defense capabilities are really only useful against attack helicopters.
The F-35 can't take the beating that an A-10 would shrug off but it's unlikely to receive such a beating. In an anti-armor role the F-35 isn't going to do low and slow strafing runs with its guns and doesn't need keep its boresight on target to hit with its air-to-ground missiles. In the CAS role the F-35 has a much longer range, higher speed, and longer loiter time than the A-10. It can deliver precision guided munitions much faster than the A-10 and then scamper off to the next target.
The F-35 is also capable of carrying more combat payload than the A-10. It can carry more munitions faster and farther than the A-10, all with low observability (depending on payload configuration obviously). When it returns from a CAS or strike mission it can also re-arm and fly CAP.
The A-10 is a nice plane and obviously very survivable. Its replacement however does not need to have all of the exact same characteristics to perform the same tasks.
I would modify this advice slightly by suggesting you print out the documentation and get it professionally bound. In fact print out multiple copies. Document (and print) all the details of the development and maintenance processes. Everything from electrical schematics and tolerances to specific compiler versions.
Take the time to paginate all of the documentation and then build indices. When referencing code modules give printed hash values so potential bit rot can be detected.
I have CD-Rs, hard drives, and floppy disks that are twenty years old and can no longer be read reliably. However I have forty year old technical documentation that I can read with no issues.
For the past twenty years Microsoft's two major sources of income were Windows and Office. One is an operating system to make the computer go and the other is software to let people do something with it.
Windows is mostly tied to the sales of x86 computers. PC sales peaked in about 2010 and aren't likely to get back to that high point. That doesn't mean Microsoft is doomed. They're doing the smart thing and porting their software to growing platforms.
This means the market for Office can explode. Not only do they keep their position on PCs but can expand it to iOS and Android devices of which there are billions.
Office on iOS and Android means there's a bridge between the Microsoft dominated world of the PC and the mobile world where they have an inferior position. This reinforces their desktop position because Office remains the de facto standard in business, even when their mobile devices don't run Windows.
Microsoft isn't alone here. Adobe, Autodesk, and plenty of other traditional software houses are looking to extend their reach to mobile platforms. Mobile isn't necessarily replacing the traditional desktop but is growing independently.
In one case, the passengers can (and will, it's been done) rise up and fight the attacker.
In the only case there is no recourse, your only option is to sit there and die.
You wouldn't download a car would you?
Oh man sweet an unbiased report about the importance of Linux certifications! From a job board and a organization selling Linux certifications no less. I bet this report is totally legit and has hard numbers to back up all of the claims. I'm probably not going to be disappointing from some obvious slashvertisement.
Also a fair point. I cannot believe is 2015 and Google still hasn't figured this out.
No really an apology for google though, more of a "here is how google royally screwed up in their relationships with carriers that Apple and Microsoft seem to have gotten right".
If you actually look at the Gartner report the TechCrunch is based upon you'll see TC sort of dropped the ball here. While it's true that worldwide PC sales are up 1% 4Q14 vs 4Q13, year over year sales figures show PC sales total for the year down 0.2%. What the numbers actually say is the PC market would be far worse off if it hadn't been for a slew of super cheap Windows tablets (counted by Gartner as PC sales) and laptops sold around the holidays. These sales have only come from Microsoft and Intel basically subsidizing the PC market to provide some sort of down market competition to Android and iOS tablets.
If you look at IDC's numbers covering the same time period you've got a YoY drop of 2.1% worldwide. IDC does not count things like the HP Stream 7 or the Surface Pro as a PC in their reporting. However IDC counts Chromebooks as PCs where Gartner does not.
No matter what numbers you look at the PC market is seeing declining sales worldwide. Even if you believe the Gartner growth numbers for 4Q14, they're still a full 4% lower than 4Q12. It looks even worse if you compare the numbers to 2011 or 2010.
It's not a story about traditional PCs vs tablets. The real interesting story is smart phones vs everything else. A smart phone (unlike a PC) is useful for pretty much every demographic in mature and emerging markets. They are where the future growth is going to be. That's not to say the PC is going to disappear but I doubt the market will ever see growth like 2000-2010 and likely will never see another peak like that of 2010.
Depends on the car. Jeep Wranglers are not bad.
To be or not to be, that is the bottom line.