Generally, education is not an answer to industry demands, and this is especially true for IT. Industry demands usually target the global workforce market, and your country may not even be competitive in that. Also, industry demands as documented by hiring practices are also far removed from a job's technical aspects, and business efficiency politics is the overriding factor. Therefore, you can't asess skill sets that you could bring to a college system to educate for, when all you have is only an observation of the behavior of an industry.
Side question: is HR generally a disappearing breed that tries to desperately hold on to its turf by pushing added demands on applicants and by just playing policeman?
why, India is stealing all the information jobs for dollars a day, no one can compete with those wages .
course back then you could buy windows 3.1 and install it on all the pc's in your house... now one license one pc (course all pc's come with the OS now, so cheaper just to buy a new pc as the windows cd costs about the same price but I get what your saying, a laptop back then was like 5-6k
No, HR is not dying. However, in the larger corporations it is still a large issue. Their job pretty much is to do all the hiring, place the job requirements for each position, and ensure that the people are qualified. However, a lot of the time they get a letter saying something like "Hire 5 Hardware Techs, with at least 2 years experience". They then take it upon themselves to add in more requirements, as they think are needed. College Degrees are often big, because a large corporation can get tax benefits for hiring college grads. And because they have heard certain buzz-words, they will tack on even more requirements, like certifications that are useless for the position (like requiring a Network Administrator to also have A+), and a lot of other nonsense. When I actually get in front of the hiring authority for an interview, I generally get the position 8 times out of 10. My biggest problem has been getting past HR. This was especially true 10 years ago, when colleges did not teach networking and an IT degree meant programming. Now a lot of them have wised up, realizing that having a certification can be more important then a degree, but still they often tack it on anyways. Another problem I have had is my military background. A lot of them look at my 15 years there, and pretty much write it off. I have seen that over and over and over again. A few months ago I submitted over 50 resumes, and got exactly 3 calls back. Not to unusual, but in each of the phone interviews, they told me they wanted somebody with "recent experience only". Well, I did not just sit on my bottom doing nothing for the last 5 years. Heck, computers was part of my job in the Army, but that does not matter much, they want to see big corporations, not the military.
Agreed... and thanks very much for the vids! You may enjoy this... (*)(*)(*)(*)... that is just a clip... all traces of this video seem to have dissappeared. http://tpb.chezber.org/torrent/4674...1994.DVDRip.XViD-CCC_(last_days_of_Commodore)
The economy need fewer idiots graduating with pieces of paper paid for by the gubermint. The economy need more repatriation of manufacturing.
(*)(*)(*)(*)it. I am not aware what happened... but when google acquired youtube, it went away. If you can find it, I am sure you will appreciate it. It is "The Death Vigil" The Last Days of Commodore.
Well, the Extended Trailer is still up. [video=youtube;hHI7_pU0y70]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHI7_pU0y70[/video] Since this is a commercial DVD, it was probably removed. Watching it is kinda sad though. Commodore is a great example of a company that had it all. The most popular computer in the world, and still the holder of the most popular computer series ever made in terms of sales, the C-64/128. It took until 1998 for all of the various IBM clones to finally surpass that number. They had 40% of the entire marketshare for Personal Computers, and the C-64 was sold for an amazing 14 years. Then the entire corporation imploded within a few years. Mostly this was a colossal failure in management, misunderstanding one of the key facts of the computer industry: It is software that drives the business, not the hardware. Commodore for to many years tried to follow the idea of "bigger and better" or "cheaper and easier to use", by creating a slew of computers that were incompatible with each other. For all of the successfull computers they made (Pet, Vic-20, C-64, Amiga), they made or designed an amazing number of computers that were largely compatible with nothing else in their line-up. The Max, 16, +4, the almost PC compatible CBM, and others that were either never released or barely released, like the first portable (SX-64), the first "laptop" (CLCD), and some of the first CD based game consoles (CD32/CDTV). In fact, the last 2 items were actually miniaturized but fully functional Amiga computers in and of themselves. The company had great products, but never seemed to settle down on "standards". I was one of them that by the time the Amiga came out, I had soured on the company. I saw some early units, but thought to myself "Yea, and in another 6 years the incompatible Amiga II will come out, and this will be another doorstop". And having already made the leap from Pet to Vic to C-64, I was not willing to yet again throw out thousands of dollars in software, just to jump to the newest in hardware. Some people are aware that Compaq released the first "PC Compatible" computer in November of 1982. But earlier in the year, Commodore released the CBM, "Commodore Business Machine". Released with an MOS processor, it could also accept an 8088 and run MS-DOS. But it was not "PC Compatible", so any software would have needed to be written specifically for ths computer. Finally very late in the game, they started to release PC clones, but it was to little to late. Released in 1987, the Colt had an 8088 processor, when the rest of the industry was already moving to the 80386. And the rest of their offerings were pretty much the same, a generation or two behind the rest of the industry (their final release was a Cyrix 486 clone, when the rest of the industry had moved to the Pentium). I would not call the demise mismanagement, as much as making bad decisions. They would keep compatibility with some of their hardware (floppy drives), but not with others (power supplies, expansion cards). Some would keep cross-platform with basic programs (Pet to VIC, VIC to C-64), but not a way to move the programs which required them to be entirely entered in again by hand. They also had one of the very first GUI operating systems made for their computer (GEOS), and one of the first ever on-line services made specifically for their system (Quantum Link), but so failed in the marketing of modems that it never really took off (Quantum however re-tooled their business, expanding to offer AppleLink and PCLink, before changing their name to America On-Line). Yea, AOL started as a company offering online services to the Commodore 64, back in 1985.
And how exactly do you expect manufacturing to come back without bright engineers with pieces of paper creating new products that can't be manufactured elsewhere? The high tech industry IS our manufacturing base. It's the one thing America has left that few other countries can do! Why do you think Apple has begun shifting it's iPhone manufacturing back to the US? Because it's only here that people have the skills to do so in large numbers. But we need larger numbers still!
IT is not engineering and manufacturing requires people to actually work. Keep the new economic model on the brain and keep believing in the service sector. Where has that gotten ya? More people (by percentage as well) on the tit than ever
