Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Not me (Score 1) 55

As a consumer brand, yes, their support is great. You are also paying a premium for Apple products compared to a $400 white-box laptop.

As a business customer, their support sucks.

I've used Apple products professionally since the 1990's. Using it professionally today.

So your claim fails utterly. What's your next excuse? I'm sure you have one

So hey, we must remember this is the 2020's, where you can have your own personal truth!

Comment Re:Manus (Score 1) 33

The ones I have been in don't talk anything like that. And I've been in many.

Not that many apparently.

Good to know.

They talk like that in the board room, they talk like that when it's 2 CEOs out for a drink (and you got drug along, since you're the Chief Engineer), and they talk that way when they're just shooting the shit.

Good to know

Hanging out with groups of executives in Vegas during conventions leads me to want to fucking kill myself. It's not human conversation. It's weird cosplaying.

Are you sure they avoid dropping to normal human speech because you are there? Seriously dude, you're a pill.

The different scopes involve different speaking terms, those with a military bent have one set of recurring terms. Technology based boards, another. Marketing yet another, along with fiduciary involved boards. Some of the groups I have been in have significant overlap.

Board of directors. You're crossing boards and groups, and it has confused you.

Exactly who do you think is on those boards? It's not the guys in the stockroom. A meeting might have some Adimirals/Generals, Industry CEOs Educational directors, oftentimes a smattering of Division heads. Presentations, might be from Division heads, Engineers, accountants.

But that's not the point of "Boards and groups". The point is that all groups have grouptalk. Engineers and programmers have all manner of it, usually a lot of Acronyms and Initialisms. Accountants, Military, politicians. The same with the C-Suite. But you have to be able to drop to "normal" speech.

Once you have been in a field, you end up getting used to the terms used, and they are logical.

Bullshit.

"Manus is the action engine that goes beyond answers to execute tasks, automate workflows, and extend your human reach." Now that is bullshit. And if someone said that in a board I'm on,, I'd tell them it was bullshit.

And if you said that to the person who said it in the board of directors that I sit on, that would be the last thing you ever said in it, and subsequently, that position.

Perhaps my BODs and CEO positions are unique, along with every person on them. And it sounds like those you have sat on are dishonest, and probably doomed to failure. I've called out things before, from polite disagreement, maybe asking for clarification in English, to telling the person they are full of shit. Haven't been fired or removed just yet. Some spouting bullshit have.

We can and do drop to CEOspeak if you want to call it that, but that is only public facing.

Now if someone comes into a meeting and claims their product "is the action engine that goes beyond answers to execute tasks, automate workflows, and extend your human reach." They'll be asked to define what an action engine is, if their company is part of actionengine.com (might want to make certain you aren't infringing here Manus) What manner of questions does their product answer, what are the "tasks" it executes, what workflows it automates, and what does human reach mean. Is it physical, or metaphorical.

Point is someone who comes in like that will find out quickly they might as well explain themselves in plain English, or else be grilled to discomfort and understanding they were wasting valuable time.

What boards have you served on to gain that unassailable knowledge?

Board of Directors for a medium sized LLC, and smaller LLCs that we acquired before dissolving.

Seems like your experience was rather limited compared to mine. For my part, as CEO of two successful corporations, Vice CEO of another, and sitting on five advisory boards and Boards of Directors, I've been around a bit. For my CEO work, People weren't allowed to spew bullshit like "Manus is the action engine that goes beyond answers to execute tasks, automate workflows, and extend your human reach." They would be stopped - usually kindly reminded that there were all manner of disciplines here, so simple English would be appreciated. They don't get upbraided unless they persist.

Engineers using acronyms and initialisms are asked to define them the first time, then they can drop to the terms for expediency (that should be done regardless, reference Engineering presentation 101) Anyhow, you do you, I'll do me. And as my boss once told someone who was trying to bullshit me "Probably not a good thing to do that - never bullshit a bullshitter"

Comment Re:Oh but it works very well (Score 2) 63

This is so true, so true.

And it's not even US specific. In the wake of the Ukraine war, German parliament voted to give itself 100 billion of additional taxpayer money (i.e. debt) to spend on defense. Recently a report came out of all the money spent so far, 90% did not go towards the intended purpose.

Why any of the jokers in charge of our governments are still not in jail baffles me more and more every year. Oh yes, it's because they make the rules, sorry, my bad.

Comment Re:Enshitification of Github Proceeds Apace (Score 1) 73

I was hoping someone would eventually address the monopoly. Neither party does anything.

That's what campaign donations get you, if they are large enough.

This is why congress occasionally bullies the big tech companies. We all think they might want to have some regulation or to punish them. Oh sweetie... they're saying "nice company you have there... would be a shame if something happened to it..."

Comment Re:They don't want to make other OSes more attract (Score 5, Informative) 109

Just a few years ago, an app with almost the same functionality as WhatsApp (though it wouldn’t have video or audio, since that wasn’t feasible back then on dial-up or DSL connections) wouldn’t have used more than 50MB even under heavy use. Nowadays, however, an app with the same goals easily exceeds 1.5GB of RAM.

1.5 GB of RAM for an instant messaging app. It was possible to run the entire Windows XP system plus user applications on 128MB of RAM... 256MB was a luxury.

And for those complete idiots who keep going on and on about how “memory that isn’t used is wasted memory,” I have two things to say to those clowns:

1) There is absolutely no reason to use 1GB of RAM for a task that you can easily handle with just 10MB of RAM. Just because your computer has 32GB of RAM doesn’t mean you have to use all of it just for your application;

2) Your application isn't the only thing running on the user's computer. What happens if the dozens of processes running on the user's computer all have the same idiotic idea of trying to reserve all the computer's memory for themselves?

Comment Re:Native (Score 2) 109

A native Windows app uses Windows system libraries to handle tasks like communication and rendering, and relies on operating system methods to draw its interface, and so on. Basically, almost everything you saw being used in Windows 7. Whereas in Windows 11, what at first glance appears to be an desktop application is actually a piece of shit built on Electron or another “web container” whose purpose is to make a web page look like a desktop app. It even works, but with horrendous waste of CPU time and RAM.

Comment Finally? (Score 4, Insightful) 109

Finally? I’m tired of seeing apps in Windows 11 that are an integral part of the operating system and should therefore be native, but were built with that total, complete, and absolute shit that is “web apps”. “Web apps” only make sense when you really need independence from the OS to the point of accepting a loss of performance and very bad resource usage. Web apps have absolutely no place on where they would never be used on another operating system.

Comment Re:It points to AI slop code (Score 1) 49

No surprise this idiocy is happening in other areas too. There is a special kind of mental disability you need to have (or acquire) to be an economics graduate: A total inability to see more than a few months into the future and a total inability to do any kind of risk management. It worked? Everything must be more than fine and surely we can do it cheaper, right?

That is why people with critical institutional and technological skills are not treated even remotely at their value, let alone critical for organizational survival. Tech history is full of big names that are not around anymore or only in massively reduced forms. And in most cases, it is because some "managers" did not manage to think.

Beancounter think. Yes, you can increase profits for the quarter if you gut the place. We were taken over by the bean counters where I retired from.

What was once an accounting office with 3 people, ended up becoming the largest group in the place. They gutted overhead, sucking it all up to pay themselves. I was mandated to travel to conferences at least once every other year. I couldn't perform the mandate, because there was no more overhead money.

Crazy thing was, my mandate didn't go away. I asked how the bloody hell I was supposed to do that. Boss mumbled something about taking quizzes online.

I forced the issue be during the self analysis part of the yearly review, that I had not perform a mandated activity for three years, and should be terminated for refusing direct orders. Gosh did they have to do a tap-dance.

So the bean counters pretty much destroyed the place. new innovations were not implemented, and we were falling behind. Meanwhile, they embedded a bean counter within each group, and were still agitating for more. I made a joke that we were going to have a 6 figure accountant hired to keep track of 5000 dollars of pencils. And then....

At the same time I was personally performing our groups finances and credit cards.

Comment Re:Not me (Score 1) 55

According to Jonathan Rotenberg, "People want to hate Apple, because it is big and powerful. But Apple has an underlying moral purpose that is immensely deep and expansive..."

Not me. I hate Apple for entirely personal reasons. I've supported Apple products professionally for 28 years. Apple sucks. Their corporate sales policies suck. Their support sucks compared to other major PC vendors. Their device security sucks. (Realistically, their device security is pretty decent, but it makes it dramatically harder for me to keep them in good working condition.)

Wanna know how badly Apple sucked? I had a Magic Mouse go dead. I got on the phone with Cupertino. After convincing them it was a legitimate defect,at 5 p.M, they had one at my doorstep at 9 the next morning - California to PA. Their only request was to send the old one back prepaid so they could do a postmortem.

I had a bluetooth problem with my headphones. I'm rather deaf. After posting on their support section, I got an unexpected phone call in 15 minutes. I dunno if text sent an alert, but one of their support people hopped on that, and we fixed it pronto.

They prepaid my trade in of an Intel iMac for a new M4 Mac, and I got several hundred dollars trade in.

I always like to contrast Apples worst in class support with me having a in warranty problem with my kid's laptop a few years ago. (forget the brand) The "service desk" handed me a Xerox copy for me to walk the whole way through it.

Sucks to own a Mac.

Comment Re:Wozniak - the real reason for Apple (Score 1) 55

Doesn't excuse Jobs being an asshole, though.

There is a bit of a different mindset/skillset involved in CEO or visionary work. And a lot of people seem to think anyone could do it. Like the one guy who said a marketing person could do what Jobs did.

No, they can't. A person with the proper mindset and vision can market if they have the ability. But the bog-standard marketeer can't.

And a person with vision can be a bit testy to be around. I've been CEO of two corporations. You work your ass off, despite the memes. You have to deal with people who challenge everything - which is okay, except when the challenges aren't all that clever. And you are called an asshole. By people who believe that worth is inversely proportional to position. You deal with it.

Comment Re:Wozniak - the real reason for Apple (Score 2) 55

"He wasn't a product guy, and you need a product not just raw tech to sell. Selling stuff being somewhat important for a company."

Check out Clive Sinclair - he was an engineer and did pretty damn well selling his computers in the UK. Maybe Woz couldn't have done that, but it doesn't mean Jobs was the one required to help him, any competenant marketing type could have done the same. Vew few people could have designed the hardware and software that Woz did at the time.

I hate to disagree, but there is a huge difference between conceptualization and marketing. But you realize you are saying that Apple would be where it is at today with a marketing person as CEO.

Marketing people might be able to sell refrigerators to inuits, but someone needs to come up with concept and direction. I've been involved with marketeers for a long time. They pitch products, not conceptualize, design or built them.

Comment Re:Wozniak - the real reason for Apple (Score 1) 55

Jobs gets all the accolades and fame but he was just a pushy sociopath in a suit,

Suit? The guy who famously wore a black turtleneck all the time?

Anyhoo. I think people outside tech overestimate the importance of CEOs and people in tech underestimate it.

So much this.

While it doesn't fit the standard Slashdot meme of the CEO as worthless psychopath, there is a value, and an ability that goes with the work. Being a CEO in two organizations, and now interacting with them in my present position, I have to say I work my ass off to keep things running. I get called asshole at times, and sometimes people have to just trust me - it's my career on the line - but it isn't the fever dream people have about the position.

Without Jobs, Woz probably would have been a really great engineer in some company and you'd never have heard of him at all. He wasn't a product guy, and you need a product not just raw tech to sell. Selling stuff being somewhat important for a company.

Steve Jobs also had a functioning reality distortion field, something not all that many people have and that's really important for building a company...

Also this. Wozniak was Wozniak. And Jobs was Jobs. They had an important synergy. But without Jobs, Woz would almost certainly be as you described.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Virtual" means never knowing where your next byte is coming from.

Working...