On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 09:12:09 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>>> It's easier to find jobs to apply to when you have a broader
>>>> awareness of the world than just what's relevant to you right now.
>>>
>>> I doubt you're going to get that by reading some text on a screen. To
>>> understand what a new capability means, you often need to experience
>>> it for yourself.
>>
>> Hmmm, so let me see if I understand this correctly....You're asserting
>> that one of the methods that I actually use to keep up on technology
>> doesn't work?  Interesting that you'd have insight into what works for
>> me on such a deep level.
> 
> I'm saying that if (for example) I read somewhere that a lot of
> companies use Citrix to host their applications, that doesn't really
> qualify me for a job managing Citrix. If I had actually /used/ Citrix,
> or something vaguely like it, then yes. But having read about how it
> exists and people use it? Not so much, no.

Knowing about the trend, though, in the use of Citrix for telecommuting 
(for example) is something that's actually useful.  No, it doesn't 
qualify you to manage a Citrix system - but that's not the point.  The 
point is not looking like you're not aware of the trend when asked about 
it in an interview.

Combine a demonstrated ability to quickly assimilate technologies with an 
awareness of what's going on with the industry, and that is something 
that looks good.

But if you're unaware of what Citrix even *does*, then that calls into 
question (in an interview) whether you even know what's going on in IT.

>>> OK, I have to ask: What the hell is this "RSS" everybody keeps
>>> mentioning?
>>
>> Google it.  If that doesn't work, try "Really Simple Syndication". 
>> It's only all over the web.
> 
> Ooo, because I haven't tried *that* before. :-P
> 
> OK, so let's see... First hit from Google is
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSS
> 
> (Unless you meant Royal Statistical Society, which I'm pretty sure you
> didn't.)
> 
> As usual with Wikipedia, the page babbles about updates and feeds and
> XML and "syndication" and something about RDF, but utterly fails to
> explain WHAT IT IS.


<sigh>

From wikipedia:

--- snip ---

RSS feeds benefit publishers by letting them syndicate content 
automatically. A standardized XML file format allows the information to 
be published once and viewed by many different programs. They benefit 
readers who want to subscribe to timely updates from favorite websites or 
to aggregate feeds from many sites into one place.

RSS feeds can be read using software called an "RSS reader", "feed 
reader", or "aggregator", which can be web-based, desktop-based, or 
mobile-device-based. The user subscribes to a feed by entering into the 
reader the feed's URI or by clicking a feed icon in a web browser that 
initiates the subscription process. The RSS reader checks the user's 
subscribed feeds regularly for new work, downloads any updates that it 
finds, and provides a user interface to monitor and read the feeds. RSS 
allows users to avoid manually inspecting all of the websites they are 
interested in, and instead subscribe to websites such that all new 
content is pushed onto their browsers when it becomes available.

--- snip ---

Now, I read your blog and keep up on it by using - that's right - an RSS 
feed.  I have the feed set up in Google Reader so that when you post 
something new on your blog, I see it as part of the Reader page.

That way I don't have to visit your blog to see what's going on in your 
blog.  I see an item show up in my reading list so, as wikipedia says, I 
"avoid manually inspecting all of the websites [I] am interested in" and 
can see what's new.

>>> I usually visit Tom's Hardware when I want to see what's happening in
>>> the hardware world.
>>
>> I doubt you're going to get that by reading some text on a screen.
> 
> That's why I just built a new PC - to experience the Core i7 first-hand.
> :-P

So then why bother going to Tom's Hardware again?

> The BBC's iPlayer system "works". I mean, it's so horrifyingly blurry
> that you sometimes can't see people's faces clearly enough to recognise
> who's who, and often the end credits are unreadable. But technically
> that still counts as "works", right?

I don't know what kind of connection you use, but I stream on iPlayer 
occasionally from halfway around the world (did that with last night of 
the proms IIRC) and projected it onto a 10' screen.  Didn't look 
particularly blurry to me.

> 
> I just looked it up. The transfer rate of a DVD is 10.5 mbit/sec. The
> maximum broadband speed you can get is 8 mbit/sec. So... does that mean
> that people in America have something faster than ADSL or something?

I don't - I have 3 Mbps down ADSL.  I have to not be doing other things 
with the network connection when I'm streaming Netflix, but I do get a 
high quality HD image with 5.1 sound with programmes that include it.

But more to the point, do you now understand what streaming is?

Jim

Post a reply to this message