If you're working for a company that's likely to buckle under the dotcom pressure, here's your opportunity to make a difference. While most traditional companies took a wait and see approach last year, the intensifying pressure to turn the brick into a click is forcing most to walk the walk.
Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson isn't the type to hold back. Nothing intimidates him, nothing fazes him. Evidently, not even Microsoft. He's the kind of fella that tells it like it is. Some say that's debatable. However, the man Microsoft has feared for the last two years made history last week. He told the world that the once untouchables of the IT industry had fallen from grace. They broke the law, they're crooks and they must be stopped.
If your end users get wind of the latest craze hitting the Net, your network could be in trouble. Tagged "surfing for cash", this latest phenomenon is arousing interest among on-the-job users seeking to make a bit of cash on the side. The problem is, they're doing it when they're not supposed to and they're doing it using your network. As evidenced in a number of sites, users are prepared to compromise the ethical issues that come with surfing for cash while on the job, for anything between $5 to $500 per month. In return, users read and respond to e-mails from advertisers, visit advertiser Web sites and view online ads, all during working hours.
If the best things in life are supposed to come free, why is it then that most of Australia's five million Net users still pay to surf? Probably because when "free" is thrown our way, we can't help but ask where the catch is. But the growing trend among smaller ISPs to propagate the "free to play" model is set to change that.
It's not surprising that Deloitte Consulting's global operation advocates equity-based profit sharing. It had to. After losing 200 of its top employees to dot-com companies in one month alone, the consultant realised something had to give.
As last week's issue of Computerworld ran a story on page one discussing News Ltd's latest masterstroke in further securing online omnipresence, the rumour mill continued to churn out reports surrounding the hush-hush discussions Murdoch's mob was having with Yahoo.
Show me a boy at seven and I'm not too sure if I can show you the man. Show me a twentysomething IT professional, however, and I'm pretty confident I can give you a glimpse of how technology will be managed within the next decade. And that's precisely what this week's cover story does.
Can someone please tell me who pulled out all the stops these last few weeks? First there was Baan's CEO, Mary Coleman, abruptly resigning after just seven months at the helm. Then there was Lotus' CEO Jeff Papows calling it quits, followed by news of Telstra's intention to acquire OzEmail in a deal valued at over $300 million. This, of course, was overshadowed by AOL and Time Warner merging to create the world's biggest online media powerhouse worth a cool $US350 billion.
If you think you've heard it all when it comes to controversial Y2K myths, think again.
If you're not earning at least $65,000 per year, you might want to ask yourself why. That is, if you take the figures from the latest salary survey as gospel.
Most IT professionals aren't working in the industry for the money alone. And it's not all for love either. In fact, going by some industry surveys most IT professionals rate acquiring new skills as the main motive for staying with their company. In many cases, ranking it higher than a competitive salary.
As the industry spotlight begins to cast a shadow on frenetic Y2K reporting, computing professionals should prepare for what is gearing up to be the next IT news hound's delight -- electronic commerce.
Apart from incessant Y2K press bashings, the only other news making repeated headlines is the skills crunch dilemma. Indeed, bad news sells.
There's no doubt about it. Y2K concerns are finally stepping outside the realms of IT&T and reaching the broader community. And it's about time.