1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 10 Nov 2003	Volume 2003 : Issue 623       Contents:+ Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? + Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ? 
 IMATION Tapes  Re: IMATION Tapes P Re: looking for free (or very cheap) used hardware in the Dallas/Fort Worth area Re: We need your DS10 Systems * X windows: loading a multi line text field  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 15:08:12 -0500* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?2 Message-ID: <Eu-dnYnOdIUxAzOi4p2dnA@metrocast.net>  A "Tim Llewellyn" <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message * news:3FAE81D5.D9DF8CD4@blueyonder.co.uk...   ...   K > One can't help thinking that serious cultural, economic and technological A > issues are being ignored given the pace of change in this area.  > 1 > What can the small guy on the street do though?   J Duh - vote his interests (at least if he lives in a democracy) rather thanK lie back and let himself be manipulated.  That's what the recent tempest in J a teapot about Howard Dean's somewhat clumsy but otherwise right on targetL comment about being the candidate for guys who drive around in pickup trucks. bedecked with Confederate flags was all about.  K The controlling leadership of the Republican party in the U.S. (at least on H the national level) has been wholly purchased by corporations (plus someC religious radicals on the side who can be trivially courted without J compromising that primary allegiance) - and a fair number of Democrats areI similarly tainted.  If you have any doubt about this, analyze the current K 'energy bill':  while a significant out-pouring of public disgust has (last J I knew) so far kept it from passing, it has not sufficed to clean it up in, any meaningful way, and it's still a threat.  J Corporations don't give a damn about the *people* in this country, and oneK could even argue that this is entirely consistent with the obligations they J have to their stockholders.  But when they control the government as well,L rather than the reverse, we get what we have today:  profitable corporationsG with increasingly minimal 'trickle-down' effects on the U.S. work force @ (because their need for said work force has largely evaporated).  L The article correctly noted that there's a difference between free trade andB unconstrained job migration:  the former at least has compensatingG advantages for the U.S. consumer in the form of lower prices, while the K latter has no advantage for anyone but corporations - who would be happy to I employ *no* people in the U.S. (save for a few upper management types who < might prefer to live here) if it improved their bottom line.  E A concurrent problem is the current ridiculous emphasis on short-term D financial performance.  That's what got cHumPaq to where it is todayJ (decreasing core substance, increasing dependence on shuffling paper whileG someone else does the work), and the same is true of a great many other G corporations as well.  Even this can be argued to be in the interest of J their stockholders, though only if the preponderance of their stockholdersH are short-term investors (and only if other companies that actually *do*G offer some fundamental substance will come along for those investors to L migrate to when the MBA-only companies fold for lack of skeletal structure).  K So expecting the 'free market' to correct the situation is somewhat akin to H expecting application of the accelerator to halt an out-of-control truckF racing downhill.  The free market is *causing* the situation, and willJ continue to do so unless checked.  That's where the government should comeL in - not necessarily with trade barriers (because, as noted, free trade doesJ have significant upsides), but with tax policies and social programs aimed9 at increasing the competitiveness of the U.S. work force.   G When capital gains increasingly fail to be turned around to create U.S. E employment, it's insane to *reduce* taxes on them when the deficit is H rocketing and needed social programs are being cut.  It's also insane toF encourage short-term investing, because that's a large part of what isF killing technological innovation (things like processors, storage, andD software, where development times are measured in years - cHumPaq isJ certainly getting out of the innovation business, and so are many others):L a major part of the reason why the U.S. has been sitting pretty for the pastJ half-century is its leadership in technology, and that leadership is beingJ challenged by the rest of the world at the very time that our corporationsL are actively discarding what remains of it.  Short-term capital gains shouldE be taxed more heavily, and long-term status (while the rate should be G balanced between revenue generation and encouraging investment - though L other investment enticements such as tax-deferred IRAs can also help) shouldC require at least a couple of years' holding (even by mutual funds).   D As for other revenue generation, it's also insane to reduce taxes onL highly-compensated individuals:  as Willie Sutton supposedly said when askedI why he robbed banks, "That's where the money is" - and not only are those L people feeling no pain whatsoever compared with the middle and lower classesE but money in significant quantities is required to fix the structural K problems we're encountering.  And rather than try to squeeze water out of a J stone (the increasingly impoverished masses), tax the corporations that by contrast are doing just fine.   K Where to put that revenue to use (aside from taking a significant slice out I of the deficit to get our country back on at least a semi-stable economic K footing)?  Start by giving a large chunk right back to corporations, in the I form of universal health insurance:  this effectively cuts wages for U.S. J workers a *lot*, and helps both them and the corporations that employ themL be competitive again.  And a properly-managed universal health system shouldG actually cost *less* than the current one does:  an ounce of prevention F really is worth the metaphorical pound of cure, and once prevention isL universally available the need for far more expensive cures (administered inK the emergency room for those unable to pay, with the costs passed on to the K rest of us by the hospital) should drop by more than enough to reduce costs H from the current situation (and create a healthier, more productive workH force in the bargain).  I'll leave it for another discussion whether theG system should be single-payer or not, because that's a secondary issue.   D A second requirement for a competitive work force is education - andL subsequent reeducation as needs in the work force change over time.  Some ofJ the well over $100 billion (including the $87 billion just committed) thatJ we had no need to spend in Iraq sure would have helped here, but now we'llI just have to find it elsewhere if we don't want to slide into third-world H status.  Some of the God-knows-how-much money being devoted to 'homelandL security' and erosion of civil liberties would also be helpful:  making someJ minor effort not to piss off the rest of the world in the first place is aL hell of a lot cheaper than defending ourselves both at home and abroad after- the fact - and a hell of a lot safer as well.   K Aside from social programs, the government can generate jobs and leadership J technologies directly, both by direct funding of promising research and byL policies that require advances to promote other desirable agendas.  The CAFEJ standards introduced in the 1970s not only eventually brought increases inI pollution to a half and helped reduce greenhouse gas emissions but helped F turn around an increasingly uncompetitive U.S. auto industry into whatL remains a bulwark of our economy.  Unfortunately, the CAFE standards haven'tI had a significant update in decades:  vehicle gas mileage plateaued about J 1990, and *average* vehicle gas mileage has actually decreased a bit sinceH then because of a shift toward hungrier and less-regulated vehicles likeK SUVs and light trucks which now comprise about half of all private vehicles J sold.  So a new set of CAFE standards to cover those vehicles and increaseL the efficiency of *all* vehicles is long overdue, and the products developedI will be exportable as well; enabling them to run on a mix of gasoline and J fuel derived from cellulose would help stem greenhouse gas formation (suchH renewable fuels absorb CO2 as they are grown, rather than release carbonL that has been - and ideally should remain - locked in fossil fuels), furtherF reduce dependence on foreign oil, and, of course, again create jobs inE development and production of this technology (which, again, could be  exported as well).  F A similar situation exists with respect to home (and business) heatingF efficiency.  Again, in the 1970s significant advances were made (e.g.,G requiring R-19 insulation as standard rather than the previous R-13 and J offering tax incentives for alternative energy sources such as solar), butE have since languished.  Here again, not only could renewed incentives L generate significant pollution, greenhouse-gas, and waste reduction, but theH products developed (both for domestic use and for export) could generate jobs.   J But you won't find the current Administration (or Congress) promoting suchI initiatives in the current energy bill:  they prefer to drill and pollute I our way out of dependence on foreign oil rather than innovate our way out - and generate jobs and exports in the process.   J Well, I think you get the picture.  If you're a real bigot and just *hate*L the idea that gays and lesbians might be guaranteed the same legal rights asH other people, then when you vote you'll have to figure out whether you'dF rather be an unemployed bigot or a more comfortable but less dedicatedE bigot.  If you're a radical Christian ready to riot in the streets to I protect "In God we trust" on our currency and bring back prayer in public K schools (would you be happy with "In Allah we trust" and prayers in Hebrew? K didn't think so...), then you'll have to figure out just how much lifestyle 3 you're willing to sacrifice to support those views.   J There's a real choice coming up in the U.S. next year, and if the reins ofI power remain in the current hands we may have some difficulty recognizing L our country by the time the next Presidential election rolls around.  So theK answer to the question "What can the small guy on the street do" is that he K can not only vote for change but explain to all his buddies why they should @ do the same.  Otherwise, he'll deserve exactly what he gets (but@ unfortunately the rest of us will get it too, deserving or not).   - bill   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 15:26:46 -0500* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?2 Message-ID: <ppidnVr-YfabPjOiRVn-sA@metrocast.net>  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message , news:Eu-dnYnOdIUxAzOi4p2dnA@metrocast.net...   ...   
   The CAFEL > standards introduced in the 1970s not only eventually brought increases in > pollution to a half   F That should have been 'to a halt'.  IIRC, overall automobile pollutionH eventually turned downward - even considering the continuing increase inG vehicles and miles driven - after more and more older, unregulated cars  died.    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 15:23:38 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?) Message-ID: <3FAEA247.F40DDE33@istop.com>    Duncan Macdonald wrote: N > This article says that any IT job that can be done at the end of a telephoneQ > and/or a data line is a candidate for outsourcing to a low wage country such as  > India.  M Consider the evolution of economies in Asia. Japan used to be low cost. Then, J as Japanese increased their standard of living, Taiwan became the low costL country. Then, as Taiwanese increased their standard of living, China became the low cost country.   M India capitalized on the IT industry because it has good education and a good L enough grasp of english language (not the case in China, Taiwan, Japan). TheM big established Indian outsourcing firms are starting to see their costs rise L and some competitors are appearing.  As Indian standard of living increases,U India may also suffer the fate of Japan and find some other country becoming popular.   N As hard as it may be to accept, the west has already begun to see its standardL of living go down in order to survive and/or remain competitive. Look at allL the concessions the employees of the big airlines have had to accept becauseN new airlines came on the market and found lots of employees willing to work at lower wages.  K the US car makers have been aware of this competition for ages. By fighting K for continued increase in standard of living, the car unions forced the car I makers to increase copetitivity by decreasing the number of employees and  increasing automation.  M many chinese electronics firms employ hoardes of workers to assembles circuit N boards manually because it costs less to do it that way. Which is best: havingJ more people employed at a lower standard of living, or having fewer peopleM employed at a higher standard of living and lots of unemployed who survive at  poverty levels ?  E One firm has had an interesting history: Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking M Corporation. While it has always been a british bank on paper, its operations H were in Hong Kong. But as the handover to China approached, it moved itsN operations (and money) to Britain, changed its name to HSBC and then went on aK buying spree buying banks all over the world. It has recently announced the I sacking of over 7000 jobs in the UK since it will outsource to some Asian $ country (I think it was also India).  G Corporations in the west have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to J maximize return on investment. They have no duty to employ people locally,M although this is sometimes part of a PR exercise to make the corporation look  more attractive.  D Now, back to IT: the ones that will be hurt the most are those largeL consulting firms that charge an arm and a leg. It will become harder to hireK those big firms just so you can blame them when the project fails. Managers N will be expected to stand by their decisions and not blame some big consultingB firm. (remember the "nobody's ever been fired for choosing IBM" ?)  N When you remove the "easy to blame the large consulting firm" aspect, managersI will be more motivated to find solutions that work instead of politically I motivated solutions backed by some large report nobody reads but everyone ; accepts because it has some reputable name on the top page.   K On a final note: Empires have crumbled in the past. If westerners refuse to M adapt to the new competition and try to protect their standard of living, the  west may crumble.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 15:51:29 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?) Message-ID: <3FAEA8CD.3485C407@istop.com>   
 leslie wrote: 3 >    http://www.vdare.com/roberts/us_china_econ.htm K >    09/29/03 - Statement of The Honorable Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D. Before ; >    the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission   F >    What we are witnessing in part is the loss of a sense of nationalI >    identity. Many things have brought about this loss of identity. Open D >    borders, massive immigration of third world peoples, attacks onE >    American identity by cultural Marxists and post-modernists. Many J >    things are eroding a sense of cohesiveness. A tower of Babel is not a
 >    country.   M None of that propaganda is right. Free trade in fact will reduce immigration. J Make poor countries richers and their cistizens won't have a motivation to emigrate to richer countries. M The cost of that is that the western countries must now COMPETE against lower  cost countries.   L If the USA wants to "inflict" its ideas of capitalism, freedom democracy etcK onto the rest of the world, then it must accept ALL of the results of those I changes, even if they are not to the advantage of the USA at some levels.   K If India has a better educated workforce who works for less compared to the 7 USA (or any other western country) then what is wrong ?   L And you don't have to look further than inside the USA to see the effects ofM competition on the labour force. Why is Wallmart so succesful ? It is in part N because it pays its employees less (or they work more) which allows it to save$ money and shoppers save a few bucks.  N Why is Southwest Airlines so succesful while the other big airlines in the USAH are either in or on the brink of bankrupcy ? Because Southwest has hiredL workers who get paid less, and have much more versatile work rules, allowingV the airline to have far more efficient operations and operate with less staff overall.  H When competition starts to occur on price only, then one of the expectedP results is significant downward pressure on the standard of living of employees.  E >    Our approach to the world is based on the assumption that we are J >    experiencing free trade. If, instead, we are experiencing the flow ofI >    factors of production to absolute advantage, our entire trade policy  >    will need to be revised.   N You get what you ask for. You want free trade, you get free trade. If you wantF to sell your wares to india, you need to be competive. Perhaps the USAF expected "free trade" to mean that the USA would be able to export itsA products to any country and not bother having to import products.   J And the irony is that the current debate conerns not products but servicesM which are not really covered by trade deals since they go through no customs.   M For as much as people despise VAT/GST, those government that did implement it G were wise. They saw the coming of the "age of the service industry" (as G opposed to "industrial age") and saw the importance of taxing services.   H In Canada, there are rules to determine whether a service is provided inM Canada or not, which determine if the service is taxable or not. (those rules  can be murky at times).   E And if I hire some indian firm to provide service to me in Canada via K telephone, I will have to pay GST on that (considered an import). This puts J the indian firm on the same footing as a canadian firm from a tax point ofG view. (and yes, one is expected to self declare that indian service you J imported - on the other hand, if you resell that service, then the tax you" self-declared becomes refundable).  N And while provincial sales taxes are a mess with regards to internet sales, inH canada, any canadian company must charge the federal GST to any customer residing in canada.   L One must really look at the big picture of globalisation, and virtualisationN of goods and services. Shipping widgets from japan to Los Angeles on a boat isF no longer what the economy is about. Buying services over the phone orM internet is what it is about. And governments must really take a serious look N at this change because it is also part of the issue of labour moving offshore.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 15:52:20 -0600, From: "Dave Gudewicz" <k9jdk@NOSPAMarrl.net>4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?/ Message-ID: <vqtdojas0p8fc0@corp.supernews.com>   K When I drive in to work, I notice bigger and bigger houses being built with  3 garage doors being the norm.  D I notice people (usually one) driving in bigger and bigger vehicles.  J I notice people attracted to eateries that server bigger and bigger meals.  J I notice reading lately that kids are getting bigger and bigger sitting in4 front of the tube and playing with their PS/2s, etc.  I We are becoming (if not already) in the eyes of many, a nation of excess.   I Is this the fate of this nation?  Many jobs, not just IT, leaving and not L coming back.  Does capatilisum utimately and ineveitably end this way?  What; course corrections must we take to avoid this pending fall?   K The above comments and questions are easy.  I suspect the _correct_ answers  are not.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 16:20:57 -0700 % From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com> 4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?B Message-ID: <6.0.0.22.2.20031109120016.01eeb008@raptor.psccos.com>  ) At 06:48 AM 11/9/2003, Chris Moore wrote: 3 >"Dan O'Reilly" <dano@process.com> wrote in message = >news:6.0.0.22.2.20031109062837.01e69908@raptor.psccos.com... , > > The sky is falling!  The sky is falling! > >  > 2 >Except this time Chicken Little is probably right   Maybe, but I STRONGLY doubt it.   E Look, I've heard all this before.  In the late '70's, code generators H were going to replace programmers.  We were all going to be out of a job in a matter of 4 or 5 years.  I In the 80's, mainframe programmers were an endangered species.  All main- J frames were going to be in the junkyard, never to be replaced, in a matter of a couple of years.   E By the mid 80's, COBOL programmers might as well look for other work, I nobody's going to use COBOL any more.  Or FORTRAN, either; all those jobs H were going to go to people who could write in ADA, because that language  was going to replace all others.  J VMS was going to die in the late 80's.  Oops, make that the mid 90's.  OK,1 the late 90's.  It'll definitely be gone by 2003.   F Everything is going to be UNIX by 1990.  Nothing else will ever have a9 chance to unseat THEM.  Everybody else better learn UNIX.   I Everything is going to be Windows by 2000.  Nothing else will ever have a ; chance to unseat THEM.  Those LINUX guys are just dreaming.   G Given time, I could come up with lots of other "certainties" that never F came to pass, regarless of the hysterical (or solemn) proclamations of the pundits.  E I'll grant you, there's a certain, but LIMITED, class of IT jobs that J probably could be done from India (or whatever country you can name).  ButI for every company who thinks that, I can find you two who know that can't D work for their IT jobs.  I can also say with great certainty that noH company I've ever worked for in my 25+ years in the business (nearly allH major players in the business), would ever be able to outsource their IT stuff overseas.      ------J +-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+J | Dan O'Reilly                  |  "There are 10 types of people in this |J | Principal Engineer            |   world: those who understand binary   |J | Process Software              |   and those who don't."                |J | http://www.process.com        |                                        |J +-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 17:59:39 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?) Message-ID: <3FAEC6CE.8829A923@istop.com>    Dave Gudewicz wrote:K > We are becoming (if not already) in the eyes of many, a nation of excess.  > K > Is this the fate of this nation?  Many jobs, not just IT, leaving and not N > coming back.  Does capatilisum utimately and ineveitably end this way?  What= > course corrections must we take to avoid this pending fall?   I At first, you competed against yourselves. And unions made sure all their K members were paid enough to buy cars, houses, VCRs, TVs, microwaves etc. It N didn't matter because if Ford GM and Chrysler gave all their employees similar> (plush) salaries, they could still compete against each other.  N But the minute another country which was more efficient at some things startedL to trade, it caused problems. But you don't need to look that far. SouthwestI also introduced a much more efficient way to opoerate an airline and they N caused a lot of harm to the big established carriers who had been paying theirM employees plush salaries and operated very complacently because all other big " carriers were just as inefficient.  M American Airlines, for instance, had fancy computer programs to calculate the K annual cost of carrying a single fork on a plane.  Present your findings to M upper management, and they will find a way to reduce the number of forks they H carry on planes. Yet, nobody had been looking at the far bigger costs ofK having a plane stay idle for 2 hours at a gate of a big airport. (They have M only recently started to look into that).  You have to be able to look at the M big picture in order to identify the real areas where the big problems exist.     L Knee jerk reactions from the USA with regards to canadian wood have actuallyL reduced profits at US wood corporations and costed more jobs in the USA. TheG excessive tarifs on import of canadian wood in the USA have removed the I incentive for USA companies to become more efficient and they price their B products at the same price as the now-overly-taxed Canadian wood. G Unfortunatly, because of the higher price of wood, home construction is M lagging, costing construction jobs, and with less construction going on, even , the US lumber industry is feeling the pinch.  J The gap in productivity between US and canadian lumber industries is smallF enough that US manufacturers can still compete (unless our currency is- artificially lowered by US cash speculators).   J However, when you look at US IT versus India IT industries, the gap may beL wide enough that there truly is no way for the USA to compete. That is a far bigger problem.   N However, one also has to look at the big picture:  For every IT job created inL India, how much economic activity is generated in the USA because the indianL worker start to buy more and more products ? Is there anything the USA makes# that can compete in Indian stores ?   H If not, the perhaps the USA (and other western countries) needs to startH gearing up to supply those developping countries with competitive goods,) otherwise the trade will be one way only.   K Instead of building more and more SUVs, perhaps the US car companies should J start building those cheap vehicles that don't pollute much and don't takeJ much fuel so that such could compete against their polluting ilk presentlyC sold in India (eg: build a better product in the same price range).   N Free trade is bi-directional. The USA must really start to think more in termsL of exporting competitive products. It no longer has monopoly on technology. % Heck, even China has been to space.     D Since last century, it is fair to state that the USA was a leader inI developing new products and had "monopoly" for a while, but then, cheaper K asian producers took over the market. Television is a good example. Running G Shoes another.  And asians have even begun to innovate (the walkman for L instance). If the USA wants to maintain its high standard of living, I thinkL that the only solution is to continue to innovate and be ahead of the othersK so that it can profit during the period before the others stard to copy the L products and produce it at much lower costs. Otherwise, the only solution isL to lower the USA standard of living so that USA producst become competitive.    L Another aspect. "multinationals" such as Kraft don't generate export jobs inH the USA. They build plants in other countries that produce for the localN market, and use locally produced milk, wheat etc. And in some cases, it may beN a foreign subsidiary that produces the cheese that is then exported to Japan. ) What comes back to the USA are dividends.   H I would expect the current outsourcing firms in India to be purchased byL american concerns in the not too distant future so that at least part of the" profits will come back to the USA.  I And guess what  ? When India becomes too expensive, jobs will move to the 6 Phillipines, South America, South Pacific Islands etc.  K Seems to me that the race is between developping nations that have the best  education system.   G One way the USA could help curb this exodus is to give corporations tax I incentives based on total number of employees (or number of employees per  revenu or whatever).   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 20:08:41 -0500 * From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?) Message-ID: <3FAEE506.BC4FA90B@istop.com>    Dan O'Reilly wrote: G > Look, I've heard all this before.  In the late '70's, code generators J > were going to replace programmers.  We were all going to be out of a job > in a matter of 4 or 5 years.  J You forget to factor in growth in the industry. There was enough growth toN maintain the "legacy stuff" alive and thus make those predictions appear to beJ false. But in the big picture, these predictions were true. People now buy+ applications instead of writing their own.    N If every company still wrote their own payroll software, you'd be seing a hell3 of a lot more programmers than there are currently.   H The minute you decide to buy software instead of write your own, then it6 doesn't really matter where the software comes from.    K The minute SAP and Microsoft start to get some competition that offers much N lower priced products, you can bet that they will start to move programmers to$ India so they can lower their costs.  K > In the 80's, mainframe programmers were an endangered species.  All main- L > frames were going to be in the junkyard, never to be replaced, in a matter > of a couple of years.   J And there hasn't been much growth in Mainframes. Remember the heydays whenO there were many compatitors offering 370-compatibles ?  Where is Amdhal today ?   L IBM may still have a profitable mainframe business, but that doesn't mean it is growing.   G > By the mid 80's, COBOL programmers might as well look for other work, ' > nobody's going to use COBOL any more.   M Not much in terms of new applications written in Cobol. They still need Cobol  for existing applications.  L > VMS was going to die in the late 80's.  Oops, make that the mid 90's.  OK,3 > the late 90's.  It'll definitely be gone by 2003.   : That is another story. Mismanagement, not paradigm change.    H > Everything is going to be UNIX by 1990.  Nothing else will ever have a; > chance to unseat THEM.  Everybody else better learn UNIX.   / Look at ads today: unix required for new hires.   K > Everything is going to be Windows by 2000.  Nothing else will ever have a = > chance to unseat THEM.  Those LINUX guys are just dreaming.   L Well, that is pretty much the case for desktop right now. Linux or Apple MAYT unset them in the future, but right now, Microsoft has its own comfortable monopoly.    G > I'll grant you, there's a certain, but LIMITED, class of IT jobs that L > probably could be done from India (or whatever country you can name).  ButK > for every company who thinks that, I can find you two who know that can't  > work for their IT jobs.     K Anything which is labour intensive risks moving to a lower cost country. In H the past, this wasn't possible because telecom costs were too high,  butK nowadays, when a call to India costs the same as a call to the city not far E from where you are,  outsourcing to far away places becomes feasable.   F There is however a big opportunity for VMS:  if the engineers can makeM clusters work with some nodes in India and some nodes in north america, think N of the potential for sales and displacing all Unix systems and IBM mainframes.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 19:39:15 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> 4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?' Message-ID: <3FAEEC43.C69F8B7E@fsi.net>    Dave Gudewicz wrote: > M > When I drive in to work, I notice bigger and bigger houses being built with   > 3 garage doors being the norm. > F > I notice people (usually one) driving in bigger and bigger vehicles. > L > I notice people attracted to eateries that server bigger and bigger meals. > L > I notice reading lately that kids are getting bigger and bigger sitting in6 > front of the tube and playing with their PS/2s, etc. > K > We are becoming (if not already) in the eyes of many, a nation of excess.u > K > Is this the fate of this nation?  Many jobs, not just IT, leaving and not N > coming back.  Does capatilisum utimately and ineveitably end this way?  What= > course corrections must we take to avoid this pending fall?o > M > The above comments and questions are easy.  I suspect the _correct_ answers 
 > are not.  D I suspect you are correct. I take an example from nature: when I wasE young, we thought it was cool to let a mosquito "bite" and draw blood-G undisturbed until it would burst. I wouldn't be surprised to see greed,uH avarice and gluttony lead America to a similar end, but as you say, "que sera, sera".   --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systemsg http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/e   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 19:52:20 -0600a1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>n4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?' Message-ID: <3FAEEF54.D22E73F6@fsi.net>t   Dan O'Reilly wrote:h > + > At 06:48 AM 11/9/2003, Chris Moore wrote:(5 > >"Dan O'Reilly" <dano@process.com> wrote in messagea? > >news:6.0.0.22.2.20031109062837.01e69908@raptor.psccos.com...t. > > > The sky is falling!  The sky is falling! > > >o > >i4 > >Except this time Chicken Little is probably right > ! > Maybe, but I STRONGLY doubt it.c > G > Look, I've heard all this before.  In the late '70's, code generatorshJ > were going to replace programmers.  We were all going to be out of a job > in a matter of 4 or 5 years.  H For a good many VMS professionals, that's exactly what has come to pass.; Many of the rest of us consider our positions "endangered".a   -- e David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems. http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/r   ------------------------------   Date: 9 Nov 2003 19:53:19 -0600,+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)e4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?3 Message-ID: <vbPfdOZAuAVh@eisner.encompasserve.org>,  V In article <3FAEE506.BC4FA90B@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes: > Dan O'Reilly wrote:s   >  > I >> Everything is going to be UNIX by 1990.  Nothing else will ever have at< >> chance to unseat THEM.  Everybody else better learn UNIX. > 1 > Look at ads today: unix required for new hires.b >   = 	For unix jobs.  Certainly not for Microsoft jobs.  Go to any ? 	job site (www.dice.com) and search for "2000".  I'm not seeinga> 	unix mentioned at all on dice in the first page of 3100 hits.   				Rob    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 20:11:06 -0700a% From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com>r4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?B Message-ID: <6.0.0.22.2.20031109201034.01de1f80@raptor.psccos.com>  / At 06:52 PM 11/9/2003, David J. Dachtera wrote:  >Dan O'Reilly wrote: > >h- > > At 06:48 AM 11/9/2003, Chris Moore wrote:i7 > > >"Dan O'Reilly" <dano@process.com> wrote in message A > > >news:6.0.0.22.2.20031109062837.01e69908@raptor.psccos.com...f0 > > > > The sky is falling!  The sky is falling! > > > >  > > > 6 > > >Except this time Chicken Little is probably right > >b# > > Maybe, but I STRONGLY doubt it.h > >tI > > Look, I've heard all this before.  In the late '70's, code generatorsrL > > were going to replace programmers.  We were all going to be out of a job  > > in a matter of 4 or 5 years. >fI >For a good many VMS professionals, that's exactly what has come to pass.k< >Many of the rest of us consider our positions "endangered".  H No doubt.  But the topic was "IT employment", not "VMS programmers".  My statement is still valid.c   ------J +-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+J | Dan O'Reilly                  |  "There are 10 types of people in this |J | Principal Engineer            |   world: those who understand binary   |J | Process Software              |   and those who don't."                |J | http://www.process.com        |                                        |J +-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 05:57:26 GMTe+ From: LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie)o4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?8 Message-ID: <aNFrb.24810$Mc.21187@twister.austin.rr.com>  + JF Mezei (jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com) wrote:t : I : The minute SAP and Microsoft start to get some competition that offers tG : much lower priced products, you can bet that they will start to move t5 : programmers to India so they can lower their costs.  :    They've already started...  ,    http://news.com.com/2100-1021-996440.html6    SAP to invest $120 million in India | CNET News.com    )    http://makeashorterlink.com/?F1ED25D76 D    Microsoft planning huge BPO cluster in India - The Economic Times  H   "BANGALORE: Microsoft, the world's No.1 software maker, is planning toH    build one of the largest BPO clusters in the country involving around    9,000 professionals.r  G    The company, which commenced its pilot BPO project, called Microsoft I    Global Product Support Centre (GPSC) in May this year at Bangalore, innG    now embarking on full-fledged BPO operations. (Will the BPO businessuC    overtake software and hardware in the infotech sector in India?)y  D    The operations here have the mandate to support around 54 millionH    users across Microsoft's product line, which includes Win Office, Win    Server systems and .NET..."  )    http://makeashorterlink.com/?G3DD21D76tD    Microsoft planning huge BPO cluster in India - The Economic Times     --Jerry Leslie9   Note: leslie@jrlvax.houston.rr.com is invalid for emailr   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:22:33 GMT + From: LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM (leslie)l4 Subject: Re: How long until IT employment vanishes ?8 Message-ID: <J8Grb.26373$PH6.3549@twister.austin.rr.com>  + JF Mezei (jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com) wrote:l : leslie wrote:U5 : >    http://www.vdare.com/roberts/us_china_econ.htmoM : >    09/29/03 - Statement of The Honorable Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D. Beforea= : >    the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commissionn : H : >    What we are witnessing in part is the loss of a sense of nationalK : >    identity. Many things have brought about this loss of identity. OpensF : >    borders, massive immigration of third world peoples, attacks onG : >    American identity by cultural Marxists and post-modernists. Many L : >    things are eroding a sense of cohesiveness. A tower of Babel is not a : >    country.p : $ : None of that propaganda is right.   A Roberts' statement is a declaration that "comparative advantage",lF the cornerstone of free trade, is being thwarted by the international $ mobility of factors of production...    H   "...I suggest for your consideration that comparative advantage, whichD    permits free trade to create gains for trading partners, has beenE    undermined by the international mobility of factors of production.p?    Instead of sectorial adjustments from changes in competitivet@    conditions, we might be experiencing the flight of factors of?    production to countries where their productivity is highest.f  G    Let me explain. The case for free trade is a strong one with which IiI    agree. David Ricardo discovered the principle of comparative advantage I    and based the case for free trade on this principle. He showed that iflG    countries avoided self-sufficiency, instead specializing in economiccI    activities where they had the greatest advantage or least disadvantagedD    and trading for other goods, the gains from trade would make eachA    country better off than if countries remained self-sufficient.h  H    For comparative advantage to work, resources within each country must?    be mobile so they can be reallocated to areas of comparativeiH    advantage. However, factors of production must not be internationallyH    mobile; otherwise, they will flow to those countries that possess the?    greatest absolute advantages. The productivity of factors of0?    production is greatest in countries with absolute advantage.s  G    Historically, there have been barriers to the international mobilityi?    of factors of production. In Ricardo's time, GDP was largelyiH    determined by climate and geography, neither of which can migrate. In@    our own time, world socialism served to constrain capital andI    technology within the first world of North America, Western Europe andr>    Japan where there are not large differences in labor costs.G    Multinational corporations would have felt unsafe investing in ChinahG    and India even if they had been permitted by those governments to dou    so.  C    The collapse of world socialism has made vast pools of cheap and ?    willing labor in Asia and Mexico available to US capital andoG    technology. The Internet has made the physical location of employeesaF    unimportant for many knowledge and Information Technology jobs. TheF    Internet, out-sourcing, and offshore production for the home marketD    allow US firms to substitute cheap foreign labor for expensive US'    labor in their production functions.y  "    The questions I pose are these:  ?    o  Are the job losses that we are experiencing the result ofeD       internationally mobile factors of production flowing to where $       their productivity is highest?  C    o  Does the ease with which foreign labor can be substituted foreI       US labor in the production functions of US firms make foreign laborrI       internationally mobile to the US where its productivity is highest?e  B    o  Alternatively, does the international mobility of US capitalD       and technology allow these factors of production to be put to E       more profitable use in countries with abundant and cheap labor?   I    Traditionally, American wages were protected by American productivity.eC    Americans worked with more capital, higher technology and betteroG    education, which made them much more productive than cheaper foreignhE    labor. An American's pay was higher because his output was higher.o  F    The mobility of capital and technology means an Asian can work withF    the same capital and technology as the American. However, the AsianE    does not have to be paid the same wage. He lives in countries withtH    lower costs and standards of living. The large excess supply of laborD    in Asian markets means that the market wage is far lower than theB    value of labor's marginal product or contribution to the firm'sH    revenues. It will be many years before Asian labor markets tighten to=    the extent that workers will be paid in keeping with theira    productivity.  <    In the meantime, will the US continue to bleed jobs, bothF    manufacturing and knowledge jobs that don't require an on-the-scene    presence?  I    Understand that the incentive to substitute foreign for American labor-H    is greatest among high productivity jobs. The hundred-fold differenceI    between $26 dollar an hour US manufacturing wages and 25 cents an hourgG    Chinese wages is a great incentive to offshore production. HospitalsrD    that have their CT scans read in India for $20 don't have to hire     $300,000 a year radiologists.  =    Understand that when Americans are substituted out of higheH    productivity jobs, by default they move into lower productivity jobs.E    National income is adversely affected. The US cannot lose its highr3    productivity jobs and remain in the first world.i  I    Understand that foreign hires, outsourcing and offshore production for-D    US markets add to our trade deficit and are paid for by AmericansG    giving up ownership of assets and the future income streams producede    by these assets.       What to do?..."    6 A career change from IT to biotech may not be prudent:  E    http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=37377n?    US Biotech Companies Evince Interest In Outsourcing To Indian  E   "New Delhi:  Andhra Pradesh (AP) government has signed memoranda ofpH    understanding (MoU) with the governments of Thailand and the CanadianI    province of Sasketchwan to give a boost to the biotechnology industry.i  H    US biotech companies have also expressed interest in outsourcing workG    to India, and the latter can also look forward to flow of funds fromg$    US venture capital funds (VC)..."      K One *MAJOR* difference between the sky that's falling now and the one that nJ was going to fall before is the existence of the World Trade Organization, which was created in 1995:  7    http://www.globalexchange.org/wto/collier072499.htmle?    WTO: U.S. Laws Diluted by Trade Pacts Rulings Stir Criticismh    across Political Spectrum  0    http://www.theemailactivist.org/FreeTrade.htm    The Free Trade Myth  B   "...In summary, then, the WTO is an appointed band of corporate G    attorneys with the power (and the incentive) to overturn the laws ofoC    democratically-elected governments.  This is the true essence ofeF    globalization.  Corporations ber Alles!  And as you can see, underC    these terms, what we've been calling free trade is really forcedt	    trade.c  I    Currently under negotiation (and what caused all the ruckus in Quebec).G    is the FTAA, the Free Trade Area of the Americas.  The FTAA proposes H    to extend NAFTA regulations to every nation in the Western HemisphereE    except Cuba.  For transnational corporations, this would representhH    open season on cheap labor and natural resources.  No government fromH    northernmost Canada to southernmost Chile would be able to defend itsH    people or its environment from corporate exploitation.  In fact, manyI    of the poorest of these nations will engage in a "race to the bottom," F    in which their governments will promise a wide range of tax breaks,H    near-slave labor, and even military support to corporations that comeB    in and sprinkle a few dollars into the right political coffers.  F    New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman put it this way:  "In thisD    post-totalitarian world, the human rights debate needs an update.I    Quite simply, for many workers around the world, the oppression of theaB    unchecked commissars has been replaced by the oppression of theH    unregulated capitalists, who move their manufacturing from country toF    country, constantly in search of those who will work for the lowestH    wages and lowest standards.  To some, the Nike swoosh is now as scary    as the hammer and sickle."l  B    (Click here to learn how globalization creates sweatshops.)..."     --Jerry Leslie9   Note: leslie@jrlvax.houston.rr.com is invalid for emaild   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 00:50:18 GMTb1 From: Anonymous <anonymous@dontwantyoutoknow.com>i Subject: IMATION Tapes* Message-ID: <3FAECBE4.F58EBD7E@no-one.com>  E Anyone using the IMATION DLT IV, SDLT and LTO tapes and what has beene your experience... Good, Bad??  B Sorry to post in this manner, but management requested I post thisE anonymously -- they don't want HP to know we might be shopping aroundiG for a less expensive solution-- just yet....  We have calculated a cost A savings of 20K+ a year. But, we also know that magnetic media has2E different life spans depending on the vendor.  A cost savings doesn'tlG become reality unless the quality is as good or better than the productc being replaced.o   ME.    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 02:21:04 GMTm/ From: "Jeff Goodwin" <jgoodwin@maine.rrr-r.com>f Subject: Re: IMATION Tapes8 Message-ID: <kCCrb.79285$ZC4.46774@twister.nyroc.rr.com>  K We've used various vendors (including Imation) for DLT tapes for many yearsnJ and have never found any to be better than any other.  Our current longestK archive is five years and we haven't ever had any tape quality issue aroundr restoring them.o   -Jeffi  > "Anonymous" <anonymous@dontwantyoutoknow.com> wrote in message$ news:3FAECBE4.F58EBD7E@no-one.com...G > Anyone using the IMATION DLT IV, SDLT and LTO tapes and what has beena  > your experience... Good, Bad?? >nD > Sorry to post in this manner, but management requested I post thisG > anonymously -- they don't want HP to know we might be shopping aroundgI > for a less expensive solution-- just yet....  We have calculated a costfC > savings of 20K+ a year. But, we also know that magnetic media hasiG > different life spans depending on the vendor.  A cost savings doesn't I > become reality unless the quality is as good or better than the productt > being replaced.r >f > ME.    ------------------------------  * Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 18:39:50 +0000 (UTC)6 From: "Jeroen M.W. van Dijk" <jmw.vandijk@quicknet.nl>Y Subject: Re: looking for free (or very cheap) used hardware in the Dallas/Fort Worth arean@ Message-ID: <Xns942EC7FDB61F1jmwvandijkquicknetnl@213.73.255.20>  H > What is the current "market value" of an ALPHAstation 255?  I know oneE > can get them for free if lucky, and I know one can pay way too muchiD > (i.e. a much faster new system would be only slightly more).  I'm H > interested in what a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller.  :-)  A The spare parts are worth more then an stripped Alphastation 255.lG With the right info and still the orginal mem and disks it worth a lot.n  M So an ALPHAstation 255 without any extra info or spec on memory or disks it   K is the price you pay for old metal. If it still bootable and has a working tI and complete OS on it. And is used in the past of the heavy computerwork nJ then it is worth a lot more. I say 255 euro is nice price for a top model.  + And 5 euro for a stripped ALPHAstation 255.   > With this old computerstuff it was the collector pays for it.   K Arguments like the prices for a faster new system is not an issue as it is sI end-of-life stuff.There the price to repair or replace an unit is mostly tJ the search and transport cost and the collector value is has for the fool.  ? At the moment you place it on ebay for 100 euro nobody buys it.eI And if you place it for 1 euro you can sell it for 1 euro or 275 euro if o* there are two buyers of it instead of one.          o        ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 19:37:44 GMTe6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)& Subject: Re: We need your DS10 Systems5 Message-ID: <cIwrb.289983$vL1.3584441@news.chello.at>t  X In article <vqkimkbicabvd6@news.supernews.com>, "Island" <dbturner@islandco.com> writes:4 >I know I know- I am sorry and won't do it again.... >r	 >Promise!a   ;-)t  . >But seriously, we are waiting for your call !  F I did ask for details and didn't get a (satisfying) answer, so I think; you are not that interested on transports cross the pond...o  D Getting 2 DS10L instead of 1 DS10 is interesting for a hobbyist, butD I can't send my maschine (which is running my mailserver) before the< others do arrive. OTOH, I like to see a DS15 instead now ;-)% I recently saw a DS15 on EBAY for 10kh   -- s Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERa% Network and OpenVMS system specialiste E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 18:30:54 -0500j* From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com>3 Subject: X windows: loading a multi line text fieldh) Message-ID: <3FAECE20.AE77E39E@istop.com>o  K Ok, I get counted strings for each record. I need to load a multi line texta field (scrolledtext).u  K For this, I need to take the descriptor, generate a null terminated string,5L and then convert that null terminated string to an XmString for input to the9 routine that then loads the scrolled field in the window.8  : Now, each of these steps generates one copy of the string.  , has anyone worked out what the best way is ?   1-K Take each record, convert it to null terminated, convert it to XmString andi. then Insert it at end of scrolled text field ?  L 2-Take each record, convert it to null terminated, append it to an XmString,N and once done, do a single insertion of the large Xmstring to the text field ?  N 3-Take each record, append it to a null terminated string, then take the wholeN file stored as a string and convert it to Xmstring and then set the text field to that complete XmString.  L (3 seems to be the most efficient, but would require 3 copies of the file toM exist in memory (the large null terminated string, the large XmString and thea text field).  N Other techniques would require less memory, but constant realloc of storage as you keep adding to it.    B Or do they all come down to the same thing at the end of the day ?   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2003.623 ************************