The good old US of A has been off my travel plans for a long time.
This doesn't move it up the list any.
44 posts • joined 7 Nov 2011
Better to replace with new than try and port very old no matter how well it works. Things have moved on in the last 50 years.
When I worked at EDS the porting projects invariably failed, the replace with new and migrate the data were normally were successful.
But they did make the classic EDS outsourced mistake on one project. Letting go the coders who were keeping the old system going by patching the code. PL/I can be an unforgiving mistress. They had to rehire 2 of them at great cost as contractors. Nice guys, but one looked like a 1960's OU lecturer and the other a badly aged member of a 1970's glam rock group, who still thought flares were cool.
Or, could it be that they are merging with BT this year and next year all those domains will be defunct?
Could it be that this time next year Orange, T-Mobile, ee, etc branding will be dust? Not sure I want to lose my firstname.lastname@example.org email, but there again, byeeee.
Reverse parking into a slot is not only sensible but safer. A couple firms I know have a reverse park policy purely on safety grounds, you are more likely to reverse into someone leaving a slot than entering.
As you say commonsense, but at one company I worked at, it might been an anagram of SDE, the manager didn't want you reversing as your exhaust might mark the building!
That's right. OPEX is the operating expenditure that cannot be turned into capital like wages, governance or anything else that counts as cost. EE are already aggressively driving down OPEX but my dealings with BT in the past shows EE to be total newbies compared to them.
There are bound to be some problems. O2 and Voda has an infrastructure agreement to mast share and 3 are actually partners in MBNL with EE to share infrastructure. Not too sure how the CMA will view that.
3 also have a large amount of spectrum, including the lump that EE had to unload after the merger, not sure how that fits in with o2's lump. OFCOM might have an interest in that quite apart from the competition problems.
If and when the new annual license fees are decided, that too might have an effect on the new companies pricing.
Not that easy. If the call comes over wifi it hits EE servers where it is mashed to go out on the network. So a call arrives and they would have to do a whois on the IP address to determine the foreign operator and country. But even then they would not have an area to forward the call too.
It is a devil of a job to do it in the UK so trying to do it for just the EU area is a major challenge.
Therein lies the problem with the pseudo science and mythology which these organisations base their opinions.
When they were banging on about using bio fuels the potential problems were highlighted but the green lobby won the day.
Now we are committed to a percentage of bio based fuel in petrol throughout the EU and it is harder to wind this out than it is to put it in to law.
EE are the exception in that although the brands T-Mobile and Orange are in that stable they are entirely separate from any other T-mobile and Orange networks and have to negotiate with each business.
Telefonica, Vodafone and 3 in the UK are better placed as they own the firm, as it were.
Currently mobile telephony in Europe is in dire straits, the UK is fairly healthy in comparison, and if they are squeezed on costs there will less choice not more. Why innovate if every time to you try the government is there with it's cap in hand? I wonder if any of the operators in the UK would have introduced new services if they knew that Ofcom were going to reward them for their innovation by quadrupling their spectrum fees?
For those of us old enough to remember, the last thing you want is an revived nationalised GPO providing telecoms. If the GPO were still in charge you wouldn't have to worry about bills, you'd be unlikely to have a line. The one thing the privatising of the British Telecom did was introduce competition and choice. At least you can leave BT if you don't like them.
Privatisation opened up the market and while BT have, and will continue to have, the majority of the infrastructure, it is open to other operators.
It is unlikely that we would have the mobile operators we have today if the BT had remained a government company.
My father worked there and at the outstation near Buckingham from the mid 60's till he retired in '92. Lots of shift work, fitting out at embassies with the occasional long tour. He did St Helena and Darwin. I think he enjoyed it but as with all things the transmitters and receivers he worked on were pensioned off, as was he:)
World leader wedded to market economy, privatisation and private property ruins the UK
In later years we will recall that a world leader in the 1980's changed the UK economy and the global economy for ever, and not always for the good.
Not it was not Margaret Thatcher or even Ronald Reagan, but Deng Xaioping who had the most immediate impact when he liberalised the Chinese economy and it became cheaper to manufacture in China than Manchester. Not a new phenomenon, the cotton mills of England went when the cotton was woven nearer where it was grown, but one overlooked when viewed with the parochial eye of blaming everything on M. Thatcher.
I saw someone say she was a warmonger too. Let's balance it up, 1 war (the Falklands), the ongoing Troubles in NI and I think that was about that. Whereas the peacenik T Blair had at least five wars or interventions to his name within 6 years.
She was strong government when strong government was needed. She made mistakes, I feel the poll tax was not one of them, but there again I've always been a rate payer, but she is not to blame for everything. When all is said and done we are responsible for our own lives and shouldn't expect someone else to sort everything out for us.
I have an Open University degree (maths and computer science and worked in IT (and still do) whilst I studied. But my children's experiences are:
Number 1 son, civil engineering degree, now works in IT change management
Number 2 son, physics degree and works in Nuclear engineering
Daughter, turned down a place on a media and music management degree course, worked her way up from call handler to area manager in the same firm and on the way up has managed graduates from the course she turned down who are now call handlers.
People don't like mobile masts as they think it fries their brains but like huge TV masts, and in our village repeaters, because they cannot do without Bargain Hunt. Even then some of us have to rely on freesat because we cannot get a terrestrial signal. Mobile signal propagation is challenging, as is any radio signal, and up to now the spectrum available hasn't helped.
EDS was the only profit making part of HP for the first 2 years and paid for itself. Poor management by HP was the reason for any decline.
Shying away from established markets and not following up on leads because services could not make the hardware margin (40% or more) was what screwed an otherwise good business.
The men in suits were the death of EDS and HP had the biggest suits.
Well I live in the area, on a very rural exchange, and we already get better than 2mps so it's money for old rope. We don't get mains gas because no one wants the challenge of laying the infrastructure so there was never any hope of getting Virgin interested. Old beardy likes his consumers in a heap.
BT will just beef up the existing infrastructure in the big towns and ignore the rest for a few years.
Your 3G problems are down to capacity and it is not just calls. There will be a lot bandwidth taken by data users, I'm guilty of that, I use my phone to listen to the radio (nice all I can eat data deal on my contract). It is better to switch to 2G if you just want to phone as this is under utilised, unfortunately your phone will always try to use the 3G service it that is available. Your signal will show strong it is the backhaul that will lack the capacity.
With a 4G service all the data users should be using the 4G leaving the 3G clear for voice and SMS.
Outsourcing works on paper but is based on a false premise. What most companies miss when working up the case for outsourcing is the amount of unrecorded support and "favours" that most companies with in house support work on. Your keeping a block of cheap mice is a prime example. Before we outsourced our facility work I could get a 1 amp fuse from Tech Support and replace the blown fuse in a desk socket (which was normally down to the cleaner and her hoover) in a couple of minutes. After outsourcing it cost us £160 per visit so we had to wait until a lot of the desk fuses had blown before making a call.
I understood the interpretation of the Best Buy reports was that people bought a Samsung Tablet thinking it was "just like an Ipad", a bit like the "Just like a Golf" adverts that ran some time back in the UK. In which case should I take my Renault back to the dealer and demand a refund because it's not a Golf?
Nothing new here, pass on. EDS culled EDS employees to make the company look good to the vampire squid, then HP started culling yet more employees to boost the share price, so this is nothing new. The unions were rubbish then and no different now. HP won't take any notice.
The fact is HP no longer innovate so the only way they can make money is by sacking employees and looking through their rather bare IP cupboard for some "patent wars".
The actual extra on an electric bill is 9% for renewables and environment which is a bit different to a few pence.
On a bill of £1000 per year for all electric assisted housing that's a large lump.
This is a transfer of cash from the poor to the well off. It goes to roof renters too, so big business reaps the profit as well.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020