[11:51] <wolfger> good morning
[12:42] <jrwren> good morning
[12:49] <cmaloney> morning
[12:49] <cmaloney> hey wolfger, how's the supplier life?
[12:51] <wolfger> still pretty sweet
[12:51] <cmaloney> awesome
[12:51] <wolfger> but the correct terminology is "purchased service". We don't supply anything except knowledge and labor.
[12:52] <wolfger> and it sounds like Chrysler wants to cut purchased services out of IT entirely...
[12:52] <cmaloney> ugh
[12:53] <wolfger> they think that AME (now simply called ME) can do the validation of the IT systems in-house, and all IT needs to do is the configuration
[12:53] <cmaloney> someone realized they're spending money again
[12:53] <wolfger> while it's not great news for us, we're laughing about the inevitable failure of that idea
[12:54] <wolfger> in the meantime, I'm pretty sure our Ford + Miscellaneous projects will support us
[12:54] <cmaloney> well, in a perfect world they might be correct
[12:54] <wolfger> but currently working on one or two FCA de Mexico projects
[12:54] <cmaloney> sweet
[12:54] <cmaloney> viva los FCA
[12:55] <wolfger> oh, undoubtedly the AME boys *could* do our job.
[12:55] <cmaloney> yes, mg spanish sucks
[12:55] <wolfger> but they currently lack the ability or desire
[12:55] <cmaloney> which is why your company was there in the first place
[12:56] <cmaloney> it's cyclic
[12:56] <cmaloney> they feel independent when someone realkzes they're spendimg too much money
[12:57] <cmaloney> and they get help when they realize they're losing money
[12:57] <cmaloney> it's all e perception du jour
[12:57] <jrwren> that reminds me of GM and their HP contract.
[12:57] <jrwren> wtf was it before HP? The Ross Perot company name?
[12:57] <cmaloney> eds
[12:57] <jrwren> EDS!
[12:58] <jrwren> ty cmaloney
[12:58] <jrwren> GM decides EDS is too much $$ so goes out to bid.
[12:58] <jrwren> HP wins the bid.
[12:58] <jrwren> HP buys EDS to provide the exact same service
[12:58] <jrwren> couple years later GM decides to do it all in house.
[12:58] <cmaloney> yep
[12:58] <jrwren> I'm actually a huge fan of all in house. Look at Quicken Loans
[12:59] <jrwren> or look at any company which claims to be a tech comany
[12:59] <wolfger> then Chrysler says "GM did this, so we're going to do it (even though GM stopped)
[12:59] <jrwren> I read a quote a copule days ago from CEO of Chevron. He said they are a technology company, not an oil company.
[12:59] <jrwren> Because the tech for drilling an deliver changes so fast.
[12:59] <jrwren> Its a good mentality to have.
[13:00] <cmaloney> yes, we have a cock-eyed auto indistry because they keep one eye on the competition
[13:00] <wolfger> the problem with in-house at FCA is that they are a car company and don't give a shit about computer programs (outside of in-vehicle systems)
[13:01] <wolfger> so when they do it in-house, they do it with virtually no budget or support
[13:01] <wolfger> or buy-in
[13:01] <cmaloney> nice
[13:01] <cmaloney> brb
[13:02] <wolfger> but when they go outside, then the people who do the work don't really care if FCA gets what they need, as long as they get what they asked for and was quoted.
[13:02] <wolfger> it's a total lose-lose for the company
[13:02] <jrwren> FCA?
[13:04] <brousch> https://www.forrester.com/Software+Must+Enrich+Your+Brand/fulltext/-/E-RES104924
[13:04] <wolfger> Fiat Chrysler Automobiles
[13:04] <wolfger> They stopped being Chrysler some time ago. It'll be 5 years before people stop calling them Chrysler though
[13:05] <wolfger> by then they'll probably change hands again.
[13:05] <wolfger> or just drop the Chrysler name entirely I think
[13:09] <jrwren> brousch: WAT?
[13:10] <brousch> It's a report from Forrester on this topic and costs $500, so even CEOs will believe it
[13:10] <jrwren> hahaha
[13:12] <wolfger> rofl
[13:13] <wolfger> I was wondering why it cost $500 or who would pay that much for it
[13:25] <cmaloney> wolfger: It's an old ploy
[13:25] <cmaloney> people feel more attachment to something they spend real money on
[13:26] <cmaloney> even if that information isn't terribly good
[13:26] <emodzhi> which is why FOSS has such trouble
[13:26] <emodzhi> it doesn't cost enough
[13:26] <cmaloney> precisely
[13:26] <emodzhi> it doesn't get any lines in budgets, and hence doesn't exist to decision makers
[13:27] <emodzhi> and technical influencers aren't put in the position of arguing for it, and so they spend less time convincing themselves of its utility
[13:27] <emodzhi> it's quite perverted, really.
[13:27] <cmaloney> Which is why Red Hat is brilliant for charging folks for FLOSS.
[13:27] <emodzhi> yup
[13:38] <jrwren> I was thinking IBM
[13:40] <cmaloney> IBM is one of those companies that I continue to boggle at how they can get something so right and over time manage to get it so wrong.
[13:41] <cmaloney> it's like they have this "suck" field (like Star Trek)
[13:41] <emodzhi> it's their very special niche
[14:02] <jrwren> IBM is huge, more employees than MSFT or GOOG last time I looked
[14:03] <jrwren> much like those companies, there are going to be much variation of suck, mediocrety, and good.
[14:03] <cmaloney> And a shining example of marketing and impllementation by committee
[14:03] <jrwren> definitely true of everything GOOG i've seen lately.
[14:03] <jrwren> and most things MSFT with very few exceptions.
[14:04] <cmaloney> Yeah, they're starting to get their big-company schitzophrenia
[14:04] <jrwren> yup
[14:04] <cmaloney> (likely sp)
[14:04] <cmaloney> MSFT is in a very strange place
[14:05] <cmaloney> They seem like they're back in embrace mode
[14:05] <cmaloney> But it's the first fime I've seen them actually embrace, not choke.
[14:07] <jrwren> cmaloney: it depends on the area.
[14:07] <jrwren> msft also has a lot of smoke and mirrors going on right now.
[14:07] <cmaloney> Developer area seems embracing
[14:08] <jrwren> like, ".net on linux"
[14:08] <jrwren> but then you look at what is actually there, and its nothing usable.
[14:08] <jrwren> or rather, its usable for dev and toy
[14:08] <cmaloney> Ah
[14:08] <jrwren> it is nothing production ready.
[14:08] <cmaloney> Well then I'll update back to "cautiously optimistic"
[14:09] <cmaloney> Apple is down to "Please figure out how to resurrect Steve Jobs"
[14:10] <jrwren> i'm optimistic about apple.
[14:10] <cmaloney> I think they need a seance.
[14:10] <jrwren> but they aren't open at all.
[14:10] <jrwren> in fact, they intentionally close things
[14:10] <cmaloney> No, and they're even more closed than before
[14:10] <jrwren> see LLVM and swift :(
[14:10] <cmaloney> if that's possible.
[14:10] <jrwren> I think they were only open before out of necessity
[14:10] <cmaloney> They pulled the old System 7 archives.
[14:15] <jrwren> wha?
[14:15] <cmaloney> http://www.earlymacintosh.org/disk_images.html
[14:15] <cmaloney> Check the System 6.0 area
[14:17] <brousch> wat? cmaloney wants to play Go?
[14:17] <cmaloney> brousch: Yeah, I'd like to get back into it
[14:17] <cmaloney> and I can't think of a better way than getting trounced.
[14:18] <brousch> Well I've been stuck at 25k for a long time
[14:20] <cmaloney> Apparently i'm not getting email notifications though.
[16:49] <cmaloney> http://pnacl-amiga-emulator.appspot.com/
[17:01] <jrwren> SO EVIL!!! https://plus.google.com/+gimp/posts/cxhB1PScFpe
[17:01] <jrwren> I din't htink pnacl was still a thing
[17:02] <jrwren> ha, its not, even teh link on that page is dead.
[17:02] <cmaloney> OK, if that's true then SF is pretty much dead to me.
[17:02] <jrwren> i wonder what they would sell SF for.
[17:02] <jrwren> maybe some devs should pool togethre and buy it, for the good of the world :)
[17:05] <cmaloney> Man, this is a bad week for historic me.
[17:14] <DrDaemonEye> cmaloney: what makes you say that?
[17:17] <cmaloney> https://plus.google.com/+CraigMaloney/posts/JTSZxpVPNCr
[17:17] <cmaloney> DrDaemonEye: ^^
[17:18] <DrDaemonEye> I'll have to look at it tonight
[17:19] <brousch> Ah geez
[17:20] <cmaloney> brousch: I know. this pisses me off on many levels, not the least of which are good people are getting the shaft because of short-sighted decisions.
[17:21] <cmaloney> Had this discussion with the (then) community manager when they started this bullshit.
[17:21] <cmaloney> He didn't last long there, sadly.
[17:22] <brousch> Hm, I have seen brondsema in a long time, but I think he still works there
[17:23] <cmaloney> Last I saw him he was still there, but that was over a year ago
[17:23] <brousch> He got busy getting married and a house and such and hasn't been to GRPUG in a while
[17:53] <jcastro> it is raining
[17:53] <jcastro> I just want like one day so I can grill
[17:54] <jrwren> its raining again?  YAY!
[17:59] <cmaloney> jcastro: It's karmic payback for those wonderful photos you took last weekend. ;)
[17:59] <jcastro> I was more north than I am here though
[17:59] <cmaloney> we know
[18:00] <cmaloney> I was busily mowing a lawn. :)
[18:00] <jcastro> yeah lawn is out of control growing fast
[18:00] <jcastro> dandelions are insane this year
[18:01] <cmaloney> I'm about to give up on our back yard and just charge people to hunt there.
[18:02] <cmaloney> Also: reminder: CHC early edition tonight
[18:03] <jrwren> i'm going to cut grass in 2.5 hrs :)
[18:03] <jrwren> I only like the rain because of plants in teh garden
[18:04] <_stink_> jrwren: i got a mechanical mower.  i love it
[18:04] <_stink_> you are right about the workout
[18:08] <jrwren> yeah, last time i used it, it was a real workout. this time of year is the worst.
[18:08] <cmaloney> I wish our grass could be mowed with the mechanical mower.
[18:08] <jrwren> july and august it gets easier
[18:08] <cmaloney> too hilly in back
[18:08] <cmaloney> Previous owners had greyhounds
[18:08] <brousch> I had to weed-whack the entire backyard last weekend because I let it get too long
[18:09] <cmaloney> apparently their hobby was digging to China
[18:09] <jrwren> oh yeah, bumps really suck
[18:09] <cmaloney> Our previous house was nice and flat. Could get some decent mowing with the push mower without any problems.
[20:02] <jrwren> it never rained here :(
[20:03] <cmaloney> You wanted it too much
[20:18] <_stink_> haha
[23:31] <cmaloney> not sure what is going on at bean and leaf but it is packed
[23:31] <cmaloney> so i am bailing
[23:44] <cmaloney> "Birmingham Groves and Seaholm high schools “Live! In Concert: Charity Fashion Show” to benefit Birmingham Youth Assistance, 6:30-8:30 p.m. May 27 at Bean & Leaf Café in Royal Oak. Tickets are $5 for students and $8 for adults in advance at the main office of Groves High School, $10 at the door."
[23:45] <cmaloney> If anyone wants to have CHC at our place LMK and I'll PM you the address.