MS honoured the warranties and even paid shipping both ways. On top of that, they extended warranties where necessary.
Keep living in your dreamworld fanboi.
15 posts • joined 24 Jun 2009
I am not talking about someone who does nothing. A real manager has lots of work to do and has to constantly work with the team. I am talking about a manager who has a vision and understands the strengths and weaknesses of his team. I am talking about someone who can sit down and have a technical discussion with his team so they can create a good product.
If you don't need such a manager in your company then most likely you are running a very small company that is better off with some certified engineer who can troubleshoot little problems here and there.
At least you are not expecting them to know everything. Yes, a good graduate will go out and figure out a solution to a problem he has never seen before. He will constantly spend time learning new things and applying new ideas.
However, if you are running some kind of specialised software that you company created and you are not willing to give training then you are an idiot. You cannot expect them to go out and open a book and give you solutions the next day. Even those who manage that it would be a completely out of luck. At the end of the day it may not even be cost effective for you to wait for them to learn things on their own. Or do you expect them to go out on a training course and pay for it out of their own pocket only to acquire skills that they may never need again in their lives?
Perhaps employers should realise that a CS graduate is not there as a Microsoft or Linux monkey. You are not trained in university to be a Microsoft or Linux engineer. You are taught about the basic principles that govern the I.T world. You are learning a little bit of everything so you can specialise in the future in an area of your choice.
Someone with a "For Dummies" book will not be able to organise a company network or create a plan for future upgrades . They won't be able to design a network with X amount of server and workstations.
If you are looking for a Linux or MS monkey then go find someone certified by those companies. You will find their abilities quite limited to what their vendor provides. If you want a programmer then go find someone who spent their years programming because CS graduates usually only know the basic concepts of programming and can only do basic stuff.
If you want someone who can manage a group of MS/Linux/C++/SQL etc etc then that is what your CS graduate is for. He will at least be able to communicate with his team and understand what they are talking about and he will be able to plan a course of action on a given problem.
Employers are under the illusion that a CS graduate is a one-man-army that can magically solve any computer problem you throw at him.
If you completely disregard what the interface tell you, the fact remains that calls are being dropped. So showing me 2 or 4 bars makes little difference on the fact it still drops calls when you accidentally short circuit the two antennas.
Anandtech's review on the matter explains the real problem and shows that the signal drop is far worse than competing phones.
Personally, I don't care if the phone shows me 1 bar or 5 bars as long as i can make a call reliably. The underlying issue is bad hardware design and software will not fix it. What they are attempting to do is fool people into thinking that their network is the problem.
Even on an unencrypted wireless, the passwords to email accounts or any other account typically use https which is encrypted all the way between the PC and the server.
When you initiate the authentication, the PC uses the public key issued by a certificate authority which means that only the owner of the private key can decrypt the message. This secures both the passwords transaction and subsequent messages from eavesdropping and man-in-the-middle attacks. The only way google can have access to the password is by stealing the private keys from a certificate authority such as Verisign.
I can believe that extracts of emails have been intercepted since many internet mail servers drop the secure connection after the authentication is completed but this still leaves us with half the truth.
And i am typing this on a Macbook Pro.
The very fact that they have such strict control over their hardware and software and that they still have problems with each and every update, makes Apple a pathetic excuse of a company.
To put it into perspective: if Microsoft (who has no control over hardware configurations) were to have such problems with every update they issue (they issue updates far more frequently than Apple) and considering their market share, then the entire world would stop a couple of times every month.
Safari 5 is still crashing two or three times a day for me and they keep blaming Flash. I cannot recall IE crashing on me in recent years and my browsing habits on PC and Mac are identical. And no, I have no pluggins on either browser. Aside from that, Applications on the Mac crash way more often and generally the whole platform is far more unreliable compared to Windows.
Sorry Apple, I have tried your crap twice and paid good premium for them. Never again in this life. Now do the world a favour and roll over and die like you did in the 90s and this time take the fanbois with you.
Your theory is far from practice. Replace london with a crater and then come tell me if the rest of the UK will be able to access anything. The chances are, all the peripheral nodes will go down as well just from the lack of routing paths. Yes, you will find that many times your packets take some pretty long routes in order to reach their destination and those routes usually go through some main exchange points.
o Dnot blame the pc for your incompetence. i have a mac and they are just as bad as a pc and far worse in many ways. if you have been using windows 7 or even windows vista, a move to a mac will make you feel like you have gone back to win xp days.
various things crash, the security is a big hole waiting for a disaster and it is flawed by design in many ways. I will elaborate on a couple of things just so you can get a taste.
I got a Macbook Pro with aluminium unibody. Ever noticed the lack of air-vents in photos? Guess what happens if you try to run anything intensive. Yep, it gets extremely hot and thanks to the great heat conductivity of aluminium, you get scorched good if you touch it.
It comes from the factory set up to auto-login the administrator even if you have set up a password. Awesome security. MS was flamed for giving admin rights to the default account but at least it always asked for a password to log in. Why is it ok for Apple to do this?
It comes with the firewall disabled. Awesome security there.
Safari has crashed more times than I care to count. And it is not the only app doing that. Just works eh? I take pride in the crash reports I send to apple engineers, along with a few choice words in the comment box.
If you set it up to lock the user after a period of inactivity and an application shows a message on shut down, then your account does not get locked and anyone can walk in and see your files because OSX just sits there waiting for the user to respond to the dialog box from that application. That's because OSX cannot lock an account. You either log off or you are on and this means shutting down everything you are doing just to achieve a tiny bit of privacy.
I can go on forever but I am feeling all the blood going to my head just thinking about the money I spent on this piece of junk.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019