The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
The latter. At the end of the day, how interesting the work is ( which I think probably correlates with the title ) and how much I am rewarded, matters more than the size of the company. I don't think size is that important. I think prestige is something else. I'd imagine that I'd be prouder to work for Code Project than Wal Mart, for example.
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
An interesting question: my answer would depend on perceived future stability of the company, and longevity of the position I was hired for, on possible career-upgrade opportunities.
Also, the work "culture:" is it sixty-hour weeks, 'til death or golden-master, or ?
Depending on my age, and responsibilities in my personal life, my evaluation of risk/reward would be quite different. Would the nature of the work give me an opportunity to gain new skills, which would then "open doors" for me in the future ?
“Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their society. It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection." Edward Sapir, 1929
I have worst of both worlds. My wife and I run a mom n' pop tech shop and we're both the only officers. Neither of us have drawn a paycheck ever doing this, after both being small spokes on big wheels for fortune 500 companies in the 80s in So. Cal.
It all goes in one account from which we live on.
But the autonomy is priceless - we have it so cushy and we are so spoiled after 20 years of doing this in a rocky mountain ski resort area with excellent fly fishing in the summer. We can do whatever we want whenever we want, if we dare, and can afford it. We can't imagine having a boss anymore
Which one can you see yourself working for, still enjoying it, ten years from now? Ten years probably won't happen at either place, not in today's market, but still - you get the idea...
There's no "one answer fits all" to a question like this. I've spent years in large companies with a well defined job function and a great looking resume. But I've spent just as much time in small companies with a vague job description and a need to wear many hats, most of which don't fit in with my training. I find that I prefer the latter, even though it's never come with a larger salary and "bigger" title.
Here's a thought - start out with the bigger paycheck and wait until it grows huge, then find a big company with a narrow job description and move; they'll match the pay.
They've already said you can disable it, so I don't see it as a negative. I don't plan to use it (I can barely leave a voice mail, not interested in talking to may game console - except swearing at it when things aren't going well of course ), so I don't see it as a positive either.
I'd certainly get a cheaper one that didn't include it if it was an option. But it's hard to directly determine how much you're paying for the extra otherwise. I do consider the extra $100 over the PS4 a detractor though.
I don't even remember why I bought mine. I think it was just on sale for a super cheap price and I thought "why not?" I mainly use it to play blu-rays. Though, I do like that I can play a bunch of old games on it (Sonic, Oddworld, Spyro, and so on). Not that I play them very often.
I dunno. They've clearly stated the business model -they- want. This is damage control.
I love my xbox360, but they've lost my trust here.
I suspect as soon as they figure things have blown over, they'll just revert the terms. Throw out a "required" update to play new games, and oh darn sorry, because of "security" requirements your xbox1 must always be online now... tada. Right back to square one.
I'd suggest extreme patience. Hold off buying a while. Months... Years... whatever. See how it plays out first. -- Ian
They've stepped too far back. What they should've done was treat games on disc differently than digital purchases. Games on disc should have been treated as they are on the 360 (resellable, no check-in required, etc.) while digital games (yeah, I know, they're all digital but you know what I mean) would require the check-in, be loanable, etc. That way, if you live on a submarine and can't do the check-ins or don't want to deal with the "hassle" of the new DRM, you buy your games on disc and are good to go. But if you want the benefits of the new system, you go digital.
That's not a bad idea. I was a little disappointed they also pulled the benefits of the new system, e.g. sharing games with "family members". I think they missed a good chance to find a middle ground that could have given them a better model than the traditional console game model.
I think they missed a good chance to find a middle ground that could have given them a better model than the traditional console game model.
Indeed they did. Now, as to the Kinect being a required component -- I'm happy with that design decision. And if I were someone who only wanted to buy my content digitally, I wouldn't expect them to rip the BluRay player out of the machine because I wasn't going to use it.
If you click on the link below, you will see an image of the local universe. Here "local" refers to those galaxies that are moving relative to ourselves at a speed less than 8,000 KM/sec. This implies that you see will much of the visible universe. We don't know how far the universe reaches beyond the visible.
This image is a single frame taken from a movie to which a link was provided in an earlier posting on this forum. The movie was in the public domain - no copyright - so I don't believe copying single frames from it will be an issue.
The lines represent the movement of many galaxies in our visible universe. If you look carefully just right of center of the image, you will see a tiny sphere that represents the Milky Way - Our galaxy.
Towards the left edge of the image is the gravitational anomaly called The Great Attractor. Much of our universe seems to be getting sucked towards this anomaly. What happened here? Is this the spot God intended as the origin of the next big bang? Or did He accidentally divide gravity by zero here?
Either way, a few billion years from now, we all seem destined to be sucked into an unpredictable future in this anomaly. Most probably we will face severe gravitational tidal forces, that will first string us out into molecules, then the molecules into atoms, the atoms into a plasma of particles and lastly the particles into long thin strings - of what?
Luckily I will be pushing up the daisies long before then, but what about our progeny? Will they have the technology to travel through a wormhole to another universe in time? But considering the rate at which our government is cutting the space budget, NASA will be long gone and the USA will no longer have space ships. Luckily there is always China to save our bacon. Maybe they will have the technology?
Question: Will you buy a ticket to another universe on a starship stamped "Made in China"?
Cornelius Henning -------------------------------------------------------------------------- See how system into system runs - What other planets circle other suns. -- Alexander Pope
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein