Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Bandwagons (Score 1) 148

In other news, Bandwagon jumpers are shocked to discover that the cool new doohickey they read about in Tech Fashion Trends Magazine, doesn't actually magically fix every problem you throw it at.

Computer technology has now been around and commonplace for several decades now. It isn't knew that this stuff is complicated, and getting even more complicated with each passing year.

And yet while a client would never demand a builder use this specific kind of scaffolding and cement to build with because they read about how cool it was in some magazine, for some inexplicable reason people DO think that this is an entirely acceptable thing to do when it comes to software.

But that's ok. Customers who do this are a fantastic boon to the consulting industry. First for the slimey consultants (usually offshored to keep costs "low") that sell customers exactly what they want for, for cheap, and then for the much more expensive consultants later on who are tasked with trying to recover the steaming crater of a system the previous consultants left behind.

Comment Re:Uh, why? (Score 1) 207

The problem with OS/2 wasn't technical. It was because the internal politics at IBM were so caustic that different departments had a vested interest in not letting other departments succeed, and OS/2 was seen as a threat (somehow) to the mainframe business.

OS/2 was a fantastic OS. It completely blew Windows away by pretty much every technical measure. But nobody cared cause it didn't get market share, and that was because people at IBM didn't *want* it to get marketshare.

But fast forward to today, and your point isn't unreasonable. The only ways OS/2 can be useful at this point is for people who need to maintain something very old that costs more to replace than maintain.

Comment Re:No problem! (Score 1) 68

I was referring specifically to Google's social media nonsense. I've never relied on gmail for the exact reasons you state.

I've tried to use duckduckgo, but their search results quite simply arn't as good a lot of the time, and I am invariably forced to use google anyway. They may be unable to do anything else right, but their search tools are still the benchmark that everyone else strives to reach.

Comment Re:No problem! (Score 1) 68

Seriously? You're really going there? Do you really have that much difficulty seeing the bigger picture here?

It was *their* choice to offer the service for free. It was *their* choice to call out to all and sundry, "Please! Use our free service!" *They* were actively encouraging, if not demanding, people use their services, to the point where google was forcibly tying their social media platforms into everything else.

Then they took it away and said, "Just kidding! Use THIS free service instead!"

Then they took it away and said, "Just kidding! Use THIS free service instead!"

Then they took it away and said, "Just kidding! Use THIS free service instead!"

The fact that it's free is irrelevant. It doesn't matter how free something is, if you can't even depend on it lasting a week before it's replaced with something else.

I personally have ZERO interest in using Google Talk, Hangouts, Allo, any other social media service they happen to come out with this particular afternoon. The only reason I ever even considered the option, is because other people I want to communicate with use it and they didn't want to use anything else.

But thanks to Google's idiocy, less and less people are relying on these services, and that suits me just fine cause I have one less service to worry about. Of course, about 40 other completely independent services have come out in the process, so it's hard to say if it's a win or not.

Messaging today has turned into a complete joke, and a large part of the blame for that can be laid on Google's doorstep for not being stable enough to put out a reliable product, and forcing people to look for alternatives.

Comment No problem! (Score 5, Interesting) 68

Sounds like it's high time to completely boycott all of these stupid services that google makes.

I swear, I have never in my life met a company with such unbelievably severe, systemic organizational ADD, such that they can't seem to keep any of their services in operation for more than a few years before they get bored and try to convince everyone to change to something else.

It's to the point where I'm honestly surprised that Google Maps is still available.

Comment FFS (Score 2) 38

Why is it *always* necessary to compare a government agency to how an equivalent private agency would run?

It's really that unbelievably difficult to understand that private business and public services operate in wildly different ways, with wildly different purposes and goals?

Do people have *any* idea how much things would cost if all government services were for profit? Either virtually every government run service would have to shut down, or be priced to the point where no one but the wealthy would be able to afford them.

If you want to argue that CSIR isn't fulfilling it's mission, that's fine. Argue away. But to argue that CSIR should be shut down because it isn't make a profit? That's just so mindbogglingly insane that it's not even wrong.

Why not apply the same criteria to every other government service? DMV? Libraries? Public schools? Roads? Emergency Services? Basic Utilities like water and sanitation? They should all be profitable or shut down! Hell, disband government entirely and make *everything* a for-profit company. You need clean water? Then you won't mind paying $10/gallon for it cause some Martin Shkreli clone wants to line his pockets.

Suddenly all you people who bitch about taxes being theft will be singing a wildly different tune. Assuming you can sing at all because you will be left financially destitute just trying to not die.

Comment We don't need to "stop" it (Score 4, Insightful) 211

You know, a thought just occurred to me.

If people can at least agree that climate change is happening (man-caused or otherwise), can we not also agree that some form of mitigation is necessary? It's not as if climate change is an unheard of thing on our planet. That's not even the issue.

Humans are unique in that we can modify an environment to suit us, but that doesn't make us any less dependant on the other species on this planet, and so it is *still* in our best interests to keep things on as much an even keel as possible.

Species evolve slowly over time. As conditions change, animals *will* evolve. But if conditions change too quickly, then there isn't enough time to adapt and species die. So we don't necessarily need to stop it... only slow it down as much as we can so that everything else can keep up and we don't risk getting ourselves taken out in the process.

This of course presumes one a) understands evolution, b) understands that climate *will* change and c) gives a shit about things beside short-term financial gain.

Comment Re:What, you want a complex repair? (Score 1) 90

No! You are wrong! You are using OLD technology, which makes it automatically inferior to the framework that came out just this week! Oh, it has bugs? That's fine, we'll just reimplement the solution with the new framework that invariably comes out the following week!

This 'new is good old is bad' is so completely wrong, and yet it's so hard to fight against because the entire thing is based on emotional needs and desires rather than reality. And then people are surprised that modern day software is demonstrably worse than stuff written a decade or two ago, and is continuing to get worse than that.

Comment Re:Honest question: what is the best... (Score 1) 103

I would add that you should be cautious. Android invented the "landfill android" market, where the tablets themselves, technically ran (maybe) whatever apps are available in the google store, but performed so shockingly badly that they weren't fit for even the most basic purposes. Hell, I (mistakenly) bought one that ended up being so terrible that it wasn't even good enough for reading books or browsing basic web pages. Also, all but the most mainstream brands got zero updates so you were screwed for security. (Even the mainstreams are iffy)

If Microsoft has allowed the same thing to happen with Windows-based tablets, then you will definitely need to do your research. As a start, don't even bother considering any tablet $300 if you want to do anything even vaguely useful with it.

The most recent generation Surface tablets are apparently very good. I know someone who has one, and they are very happy with it. They of course cost, as parent pointed out, a heck of a lot more than some Walmart special.

I can't speak for how updates are handled. I presume that since it's Windows, Microsoft pushes updates like any other desktop. (ie: whether you want them or not, and hopefully your machine won't get destroyed in the process)

Slashdot Top Deals

Error in operator: add beer