Thread: Internet Tablets in the Workplace
View Single Post
Nathan is offline Nathan
2007-12-12 , 18:34
Posts: 452 | Thanked: 522 times | Joined on Nov 2007
#35
Originally Posted by Hedgecore View Post
I will not, and have never written a 30 page diatribe to contain every possible angle to qualify things that I've said.
Everybody has their opinions and nobody else wants to write a 30 page diatribe on every angle they have either. Hence we do get some miscommunications.

If you think you can sit back and tell me your Linux box is 100% secure and you're sure of that, then you're deluded
Very true statement! However the same applies with any OS. You have to weight things. For instance -- am I MORE sure my Linux box is not infected than my Win Box or Mac Box is? It is a numbers game. In terms of basic security on "Average" a recent auto-patching distribution of Linux / MacOSX are more secure than a auto-patching Windows box. However, that being said my personal opinion in security is Linux, Mac OSX, Windows. In that specific order, with Windows being the least secure of the bunch. (Please note I use a WinXP box all day as my primary machine -- it also imho is the box I'm most productive on). I'm pro-use the right tool for the right job.

My IT regularly comes with me into the workplace. It only connects to the Wifi provided for clients that's solely an internet connection, nothing to do with our network.
Cool, so far it sounds well thought out. I assume you don't actually have _any_ other wireless access point that are actually inside the network correct? Otherwise that "insecure" point of failure is a whole lot worse than just the IT connecting to it.


Machines are locked with strict policies through AD to prevent agents from running anything that could conceivably help them scoop numbers/info.
Nice that all sounds like pretty good security, I assume USB, & Fireware are also _totally_ disabled (in hardware) in your call center -- and autorun is also disabled for all drives on all machines in your facility, right?


And to the snotty developers getting their knickers in a knot.
I might be one of the "snotty" developers (well at least I will admit the "developer" part <G>) But based on my relationship in my company -- I think everyone in my company just thinks of me as the nice guy that knows a lot about computers and if they have a question I'm always willing to help. I also try and explain why/how the problem occurred so our support desk can handle it in the future.


1.) I resent the fact my work has to go to QA, I checked it myself.
2.) I argue a lot with QA
3.) When I get specs I try to improve them and sometimes that takes longer than the project initially allotted.
4.) I'm awesome, the organization couldn't survive without me.
5.) This is the only thing I'm good at, I suck in social situations, and I get my neck beard in a knot when people try to stymie my brilliant ideas. I know assembler you f*ck!!!
LOL, I might be atypical -- lets see
#1 -- I happened to implemented a lot of it.
#2 -- Nope, I happed to believe in QA, Programmers make mistakes; and I know I make them. QA is a good defensive line.
#3 -- Umm, no -- bad recipe for disaster.
#4 -- No, nobody is un-replaceable. In fact, I try to do the opposite -- I attempt to make myself very replaceable. I've found throughout the years that more replaceable I become the more responsibility I get. Since if I can be moved from project a easily; then I can jump on project c where they might need some help. Now, I would say -- I would be hard to replace overall -- I know we've been looking for another equally qualified developer for as long as I've been working here, which has been quite a while.
#5 -- Well I am awkward in some social settings, not a socialite by any means. But, if you don't agree with my "facts" you are entitled to your own opinions. (j/k) -- in all reality we (as a team) rarely clash. And I have no problems doing it another way. Most the time we discuss where the "conflict" is at and figure out why and the decide on the course of action.

(P.S. I develop. I'm not site support. If you're going to make sweeping assumptions about me, let's at least get it in the right ballpark.)
A couple questions:
1. What do you develop? Native compiled language, or runtime? Do you debug it if it is a compiled?
2. Do you have local admin rights to your computer?

Nathan.
P.S. Don't think I'm picking on you. I'm mainly trying to field the answers to questions you raised from a senior developers perspective who has been developing (& playing!) for 20-ish years (man that makes me sound old... <g>)