Re: Operating systems are not religions (you fools)

[Amused]

e71p@yahoo.com wrote:

> I had an interview today where I was told that, because I had
> coded so much for Unix/Linux and only a couple years for Windows
> that I had to "change [my] religion" to Windows. I said, in
> as polite a tone as possible, "well it's not really a religion,
> it's just an OS; and I'm pretty much agnostic about OSes".

Don't you find it odd that despite looking at your resume, you were still
invited over for an interview?    ....think-about-it ;-)
Upon looking at the resume, the manager should have discounted you as a
possible candidate if he was soooo windowish, therefore saving you a trip
for an interview and saving him/her having to interview such a lino-nut ;-)
Perhaps you were chosen for an interview BECAUSE you ALSO had linux
experience.

> But that wasn't enough, the dingbat manager was apparently quite
> serious and didn't believe that I could convert away from my
> Unix-and-Linux religion -- he didn't believe I was agnostic --
> to Windoze. He even mentioned that "at least" I didn't have any
> Java on my resume -- that would have been pure heresy it seems.

Maybe you were being tested to see if you can stand on your own 2 feet or if
you bend to say whatever you need to say to sound good to the manager.    ?

> But I even resorted to praising Windows despite the fact that I commonly
> watch Explorer crash under XP Pro after certain operations. Granted
> the kernel itself stays running...just don't install Visual C++!

...Appears you resorted to kiss-butt  ;-)
...perhaps you wish to sew your lips to his butt... smooch-smooch!

You may have had better luck by stating you have an interest that goes
beyond simply windows and you are willing to look at alternatives.

You, in fact have an advantage over your windows-only counterparts, because
you understand windows strengths & weaknesses based on your experience with
more than "just windows".
If you want to know a strength, you look at the pamplets of the product.
If you want to know the weaknesses, you look at the pamplets from the
competition. Because you also use linux, you can state this as an
advantage.

If you knew C++ while your counterparts only knew visual basic, would you
say you understand a computer (how it works) better than your VB friends?
Of course you would!
If you knew C while the others knew C++, again, you understand deeper than
your C++ friends.
ASM, again, better than C.  Actually controlling hardware, better again than
those that rely on drivers.

Because you resorted to telling him what he wanted to hear, you basically
told him that you don't have the capability to tell him that if you see
better directions, you simply don't have the guts to prove your point.
cow-toeing, lemming, butt-kisser, call it what you like.

Sometimes the best direction isn't what the boss wants to hear, but
unfortunately, you didn't pass mustard here  :-(

I've actually disagreed on several interviews and gotten work because of it,
and that, dear sir, is a fact!

> I must say I find it pathetic and stupid that people get wrapped up in
> their little operating systems. It's not just the interviewer: the
> bickering that goes on in Usenet is just the same, with Linux advocates
> trying to insult 'less pious' Linux users and Windows zealots making
> insipid childish attacks. The disdain that self-promoted gurus and experts
> have for the public only shows their hubris. And of course anyone
> who questions open source is automatically a heretic--the enemy.

It's just p*ssing matches. If you don't like it, ignore it, filter it out.
Find another group, perhaps arts&basket-weaving.

> And all this religious childishness is over what, a stupid box of circuits
> sitting on your desk?

Computers, as stupid as they are, have displaced a lot of work and freed-up
people to do other tasks putting them, companies, countries at a
competitive advantage.
If you can automate a process, you free-up a person to do something else
which means you have an advantage over a competitor if you by yourself can
do 2 or more tasks while your competitor requires a person each per task.
If you can become the middleman power-broker, you have a huge amount of
power over those that need computers to compete.
You really-truely underestimate the power of the computer.... perhaps you
should move into some village in the jungle somewhere and become a farmer
where you don't have to see a computer or be affected by them.... except,
you still will be affected, even there, believe it or not.

> Why the hell care? These people need to get a LIFE.

A monopoly because you are the best at what you do is one thing, and there
is nothing wrong with being best at it, however, a monopoly because you
cripple the competition, that is wrong, and I think you know who we're
speaking of here.

Take telephones for example.
If we had MaBell with no competition allowed, you would probably still be
using rotary dial phones rented to you by the phone company AT&T.

Tell us... are you still renting your rotary dial phone or are you one of
the many people who have choice and benefitted from competition?



Instead of being sour over not getting the job there, if the manager were
truely a dingbat, you should be happy you aren't working for a dingbat.