Search Results

Search found 7669 results on 307 pages for 'dealing with clients'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 4/307 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Java Spotlight Episode 76: Pro Java FX2 - A Definative Guide to Rich Clients with Java Technology

    - by Roger Brinkley
    Tweet An interview with the authors of Pro Java FX2: A Definative Guide to Rich Clients with Java Technology. Right-click or Control-click to download this MP3 file. You can also subscribe to the Java Spotlight Podcast Feed to get the latest podcast automatically. If you use iTunes you can open iTunes and subscribe with this link:  Java Spotlight Podcast in iTunes. Show Notes News Angela Caicedo has created 3 new Java FX screen cast videos on java UTube channel: Part 1: Building your First Java FX Application with Netbeans 7.1, Part 2: Building your First Java FX Application with Netbeans 7.1, and Getting Started with Scene Builder.  Events March 26-29, EclipseCon, Reston, USA March 27, Virtual Developer Days - Java (Asia Pacific (English)),9:30 am to 2:00pm IST / 12:00pm to 4.30pm SGT  / 3.00pm - 7.30pm AEDT April 4-5, JavaOne Japan, Tokyo, Japan April 12, GreenJUG, Greenville, SC April 17-18, JavaOne Russia, Moscow Russia April 18–20, Devoxx France, Paris, France April 26, Mix-IT, Lyon, France, May 3-4, JavaOne India, Hyderabad, India Feature InterviewPro JavaFX 2: A Definitive Guide to Rich Clients with Java Technology is available from Amazon.com in either paperback or on the Kindle.James L. (Jim) Weaver is a Java and JavaFX developer, author, and speaker with a passion for helping rich-client Java and JavaFX become preferred technologies for new application development. Books that Jim has authored include Inside Java, Beginning J2EE, and Pro JavaFX Platform, with the latter being updated to cover JavaFX 2.0. His professional background includes 15 years as a systems architect at EDS, and the same number of years as an independent developer. Jim is an international speaker at software technology conferences, including the JavaOne conferences in San Francisco and São Paulo. Jim blogs at http://javafxpert.com, tweets @javafxpert. Weiqi Gao is a principal software engineer with Object Computing, Inc., in St. Louis, MO. He has more than 18 years of software development experience and has been using Java technology since 1998. He is interested in programming languages, object-oriented systems, distributed computing, and graphical user interfaces. He is a presenter and a member of the steering committee of the St. Louis Java Users Group. Weiqi holds a PhD in mathematics. Stephen Chin is chief agile methodologist at GXS and a technical expert in client UI technologies. He is lead author on the Pro Android Flash title and coauthored the Pro JavaFX Platform title, which is the leading technical reference for JavaFX. In addition, Stephen runs the very successful Silicon Valley JavaFX User Group, which has hundreds of members and tens of thousands of online viewers. Finally, he is a Java Champion, chair of the OSCON Java conference, and an internationally recognized speaker featured at Devoxx, Codemash, AnDevCon, Jazoon, and JavaOne, where he received a Rock Star Award. Stephen can be followed on twitter @steveonjava and reached via his blog: http://steveonjava.com.Dean Iverson has been writing software professionally for more than 15 years. He is employed by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, where he is a rich client application developer. He also has a small software consultancy called Pleasing Software Solutions, which he cofounded with his wife. Johan Vos started to work with Java in 1995. As part of the Blackdown team, he helped port Java to Linux. With LodgON, the company he cofounded, he has been mainly working on Java-based solutions for social networking software. Because he can't make a choice between embedded development and enterprise development, his main focus is on end-to-end Java, combining the strengths of backend systems and embedded devices. His favorite technologies are currently Java EE/Glassfish at the backend and JavaFX at the frontend. Johan's blog can be followed at http://blogs.lodgon.com/johan, he tweets at http://twitter.com/johanvos. Mail Bag What’s Cool Gerrit Grunwald's SteelSeries FX Experience Tools Canned Animations ComboBox

    Read the article

  • Dealing with selfish team member(s)

    - by thegreendroid
    My team is facing a difficult quandary, a couple of team members are essentially selfish (not to be confused with dominant!) and are cherry-picking stories/tasks that will give them the most recognition within the company (at sprint reviews etc. when all the stakeholders are present). These team members are very good at what they do and are fully aware of what they are doing. When we first started using agile about a year ago, I can say I was quite selfish too (coming from a very individual-focused past). I took ownership of certain stories and didn't involve anyone else in it, which in hindsight wasn't the right thing to do and I learnt from that experience almost immediately. We are a young team of very ambitious twenty somethings so I can understand the selfishness to some extent (after all everyone should be ambitious!). But the level to which this selfishness has reached of late has started to bother me and a few others within my team. The way I see it, agile/scrum is all about the team and not individuals. We should be looking out for each other and helping each other improve. I made this quite clear during our last retrospective, that we should be fair and give everyone a chance. I'll wait and see what comes out of it in the next few sprints. In the meantime, what are some of the troubles that you have faced with selfish members and how did you overcome them?

    Read the article

  • Dealing with a developer continuously ignoring edge cases in his work

    - by Alex N.
    I have an interesting, fairly common I guess, issue with one of the developers in my team. The guy is a great developer, work fast and productive, produces fairly good quality code and all. Good engineer. But there is a problem with him - very often he fails to address edge cases in his code. We spoke with him about it many times and he is trying but I guess he just doesn't think this way. So what ends up happening is that QA would find plenty issues with his code and return it back for development again and again, ultimately resulting in missed deadlines and everyone in the team unhappy. I don't know what to do with him and how to help him overcome this problem. Perhaps someone with more experience could advise? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Dealing with the customer / developer culture mismatch on an agile project

    - by Eric Smith
    One of the tenets of agile is ... Customer collaboration over contract negotiation ... another one is ... Individuals and interactions over processes and tools But the way I see it, at least when it comes to interaction with the customer, there is a fundamental problem: How the customer thinks is fundamentally different to how a software engineer thinks That may be a bit of a generalisation, yes. Arguably, there are business domains where this is not necessarily true---these are few and far between though. In many domains though, the typical customer is: Interested in daily operational concerns--short-range tactics ... not strategy; Only concerned with the immediate solution; Generally one-dimensional, non-abstract thinkers; Primarily interested in "getting the job done" as opposed to coming up with a lasting, quality solution. On the other hand, software engineers who practice agile are: Professionals who value quality; Individuals who understand the notion of "more haste less speed" i.e., spending a little more time to do things properly will save lots of time down the road; Generally, very experienced analytical thinkers. So very clearly, there is a natural culture discrepancy that tends to inhibit "customer collaboration". What's the best way to address this?

    Read the article

  • Switch vs Polymorphism when dealing with model and view

    - by Raphael Oliveira
    I can't figure out a better solution to my problem. I have a view controller that presents a list of elements. Those elements are models that can be an instance of B, C, D, etc and inherit from A. So in that view controller, each item should go to a different screen of the application and pass some data when the user select one of them. The two alternatives that comes to my mind are (please ignore the syntax, it is not a specific language) 1) switch (I know that sucks) //inside the view controller void onClickItem(int index) { A a = items.get(index); switch(a.type) { case b: B b = (B)a; go to screen X; x.v1 = b.v1; // fill X with b data x.v2 = b.v2; case c: go to screen Y; etc... } } 2) polymorphism //inside the view controller void onClickItem(int index) { A a = items.get(index); Screen s = new (a.getDestinationScreen()); //ignore the syntax s.v1 = a.v1; // fill s with information about A s.v2 = a.v2; show(s); } //inside B Class getDestinationScreen(void) { return Class(X); } //inside C Class getDestinationScreen(void) { return Class(Y); } My problem with solution 2 is that since B, C, D, etc are models, they shouldn't know about view related stuff. Or should they in that case?

    Read the article

  • The Art of Dealing with People

    Technical people generally don't easily adapt to being good salespeople. When a technical person takes on a customer-facing role as a support engineer, there are a whole lot of new skills required. Dr Petrova relates how the experience of a change in job gave her a new respect for the skills of sales and marketing.

    Read the article

  • Dealing with state problems in functional programming

    - by Andrew Martin
    I've learned how to program primarily from an OOP standpoint (like most of us, I'm sure), but I've spent a lot of time trying to learn how to solve problems the functional way. I have a good grasp on how to solve calculational problems with FP, but when it comes to more complicated problems I always find myself reverting to needing mutable objects. For example, if I'm writing a particle simulator, I will want particle "objects" with a mutable position to update. How are inherently "stateful" problems typically solved using functional programming techniques?

    Read the article

  • Dealing with "I-am-cool-and-you-are-dumb" manager [closed]

    - by Software Guy
    I have been working with a software company for about 6 months now. I like the projects I work on there and I really like all the people there except for 1 guy. That guy is technically smart, and he is a co-founder of the company. He is an okay guy in person (the kind you wouldn't want to care about much) but things get tricky when he is your manager. In general I am all okay but there are times when I feel I am not being treated fairly: He doesn't give much thought to when he makes mistakes and when I do something similar, he is super critical. Recently he went as far as to say "I am not sure if I can trust you with this feature". The detais of this specific case are this: I was working on this feature, and I was already a couple of hours over my normal working hours, and then I decided to stop and continue tomorrow. We use git, and I like to commit changes locally and only push when I feel they are ready. This manager insists that I push all the changes to the central repo (in case my hard drive crashes). So I push the change, and the ticket is marked as "to be tested". Next day I come in, he sits next to me and starts complaining and says that I posted above. I really didn't know what to say, I tried to explain to him that the ticket is still being worked upon but he didn't seem to listen. He interrupts me in-between when I am coding, which I do not mind, but when I do that same, his face turns like this :| and reacts as if his work was super important and I am just wasting his time. He asks me to accumulate all questions, and then ask him altogether which is not always possible, as you need a clarification before you can continue on a feature implementation. And when I am coding, he talks on the phone with his customers next to me (when he can go to the meeting room with his laptop) and doesn't care. He made me switch to a whole new IDE (from Netbeans to a commercial IDE costing a lot of money) for a really tiny feature (which I later found out was in Netbeans as well!). I didn't make a big deal out of it as I am equally comfortable working with this new IDE, but I couldn't get the science behind his obsession. He said this feature makes sure that if any method is updated by a programmer, the IDE will turn the method name to red in places where it is used. I told him that I do not have a problem since I always search for method usage in the project and make sure its updated. IDEs even have refactoring features for exactly that, but... I recently implemented a feature for a project, and I was happy about it and considering him a senior, I asked him his comments about the implementation quality.. he thought long and hard, made a few funny faces, and when he couldn't find anything, he said "ummm, your program will crash if JS is disabled" - he was wrong, since I had made sure it would work fine with default values even if JS was disabled. I told him that and then he said "oh okay". BUT, the funny thing is, a few days back, he implemented something and I objected with "But that would not run if JS is disabled" and his response was "We don't have to care about people who disable JS" :-/ Once he asked me to investigate if there was a way to modify a CMS generated menu programmatically by extending the CMS, I did my research and told him that the only was is to inject a menu item using JavaScript / jQuery and his reaction was "ah that's ugly, and hacky, not acceptable" and two days later, I see that feature implemented in the same way as I had suggested. The point is, his reaction was not respectful at all, even if what I proposed was hacky, he should be respectful, that I know what's hacky and if I am suggesting something hacky, there must be a reason for it. There are plenty of other reasons / examples where I feel I am not being treated fairly. I want your advice as to what is it that I am doing wrong and how to deal with such a situation. The other guys in the team are actually very good people, and I do not want to leave the job either (although I could, if I want to). All I want is respect and equal treatment. I have thought about talking to this guy in a face to face meeting, but that worries me that his attitude might get worse and make things more difficult for me (since he doesn't seem to be the guy who thinks he can be wrong too). I am also considering talking to the other co-founder but I am not sure how he will take it (as both founders have been friends forever). Thanks for reading the long message, I really appreciate your help.

    Read the article

  • Dealing with an Idiot [closed]

    - by inspectorG4dget
    I'm a 4th year University Computer Science student, and I have this problem, that I don't seem to be able to find a straight answer to: As a 4th year computer science student, I spend more time in the computer lab on campus, than even my own home. This means that getting along with everyone else here is very important to me. In most cases, this is not an issue because my interactions with almost all the people here fall into one of the following categories: Let me help you, junior Hi fellow student in a course I'm taking, I'm having trouble with this assignment question. Can you give me a hint as to how you solved it? Hi fellow student in a course I'm taking, This is how I solved the problem that you're stuck on. Hope it helps Hi fellow student, I noticed that you're working on a project, using a library that I'm interested in. Can we setup a time so I can learn about this library from you? This model of interaction works very well for me. However, there is one fellow student, who manages to make my life hell beyond all of this (his name is not important, let's just call him "Sam"). He seems to be always (pardon my crass description) high and completely unwilling to contribute to a constructive, academic conversation. He's a pretty smart guy, but just comes across as (I hate to say something like this about a fellow student, but) an imbecile. He also has ignorant opinions on important topics, some of which pertain to my specialization (AI, NLP, etc), and when I try to explain to him why he's wrong, all he does is insult me and put me in a foul mood. I have tried ignoring him (sitting somewhere else in the lab, headphones, etc), but he seems to like doing this because he approaches me and no amount of "leave me alone" seems to do the trick. Can anyone please suggest to me how to deal with this man in a civil way? Thank you

    Read the article

  • Dealing with blackhat SEO companies and low quality link building competitors [closed]

    - by Mikko Ohtamaa
    I have often faced a case where the competitors of my client use SEO blackhat tactics where they contact a SEO company to do link building for their websites and products. Here is an example of a typical case of a fake blog created only for link building purposes A very low content article http://marshallfab.com/fundus-camera-explained.html in obvious fake blog: no author information, partially machine generated text, all blog posts are solely about link building Following the link you get to the promoted company page http://www.patternless.com/ ... which, unsurprisingly, links the SEO company homepage in the footer text http://www.affordableseofl.com/ ... who are not shy to advertise their Extremely aggressive SEO plan Does Google have any feedback channel where one could submit cases like this, so that Google would punish the link builders? Are there any means to bring these blackhat companies to pushame to damage their reputation?

    Read the article

  • Dealing with institutionalized programmers.

    - by Singleton
    Some times programmers who work in a project for long time tend to get institutionalized. It is difficult to convince them with reasoning. Even if we manage to convince them they will be adamant to take suggestion on board. How do we handle the situation without developing friction in team? Institutionalized in terms of practices. I recently joined in a project where build &release process was made so complicated with unnecessary roadblocks. My suggestion was we can get rid of some of the development overheads(like filling few spreadsheets) just by integrating defect management and version controlling tools (both are IBM-Rational tools integration can be very easy and one-off effort). Also by using tools like Maven & Ant (project involves java and some COTS products) build & release can be simplified and reduce manual errors& intervention. I managed to convince and ready to put efforts for developing proof of concept. But the ‘Senior’ developer is not willing to take it on board. One reason could be the current process makes him valuable in team.

    Read the article

  • Dealing with coworkers when developing, need advice [closed]

    - by Yippie-Kai-Yay
    I developed our current project architecture and started developing it on my own (reaching something like, revision 40). We're developing a simple subway routing framework and my design seemed to be done extremely well - several main models, corresponding views, main logic and data structures were modeled "as they should be" and fully separated from rendering, algorithmic part was also implemented apart from the main models and had a minor number of intersection points. I would call that design scalable, customizable, easy-to-implement, interacting mostly based on the "black box interaction" and, well, very nice. Now, what was done: I started some implementations of the corresponding interfaces, ported some convenient libraries and wrote implementation stubs for some application parts. I had the document describing coding style and examples of that coding style usage (my own written code). I forced the usage of more or less modern C++ development techniques, including no-delete code (wrapped via smart pointers) and etc. I documented the purpose of concrete interface implementations and how they should be used. Unit tests (mostly, integration tests, because there wasn't a lot of "actual" code) and a set of mocks for all the core abstractions. I was absent for 12 days. What do we have now (the project was developed by 4 other members of the team): 3 different coding styles all over the project (I guess, two of them agreed to use the same style :), same applies to the naming of our abstractions (e.g CommonPathData.h, SubwaySchemeStructures.h), which are basically headers declaring some data structures. Absolute lack of documentation for the recently implemented parts. What I could recently call a single-purpose-abstraction now handles at least 2 different types of events, has tight coupling with other parts and so on. Half of the used interfaces now contain member variables (sic!). Raw pointer usage almost everywhere. Unit tests disabled, because "(Rev.57) They are unnecessary for this project". ... (that's probably not everything). Commit history shows that my design was interpreted as an overkill and people started combining it with personal bicycles and reimplemented wheels and then had problems integrating code chunks. Now - the project still does only a small amount of what it has to do, we have severe integration problems, I assume some memory leaks. Is there anything possible to do in this case? I do realize that all my efforts didn't have any benefit, but the deadline is pretty soon and we have to do something. Did someone have a similar situation? Basically I thought that a good (well, I did everything that I could) start for the project would probably lead to something nice, however, I understand that I'm wrong. Any advice would be appreciated, sorry for my bad english.

    Read the article

  • Instructor Insight: Dealing with Columns in Oracle JD Edwards Enterprise One Tools Release 9.1

    - by Breanne Cooley
    Oracle JD Edwards Enterprise One Tools Release  9.1 has many new features that will help end users be more efficient in their daily jobs. For example, hiding grid columns is now as easy as a left-mouse click. In earlier releases, users could click on the ‘Customize Grid’ link but still had to do several more clicks to hide or show a column . The following example shows how easy this new feature is to use. First, right-mouse click on the column you want to hide; for example the ‘Long Address’ column. The column is now hidden. Second, right-mouse over on any of the columns to show the ‘Unhide’ option. After you select ‘Unhide’, the hidden column is shown. You can then select the column to show, or unhide, the column. This new feature and others are covered in the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne System Administration Rel 9.x course, which has been updated to reflect the new release. Hope to see you in class! -Randy Richeson, Senior Principal Instructor, Oracle University

    Read the article

  • Dealing with curly brace soup

    - by Cyborgx37
    I've programmed in both C# and VB.NET for years, but primarily in VB. I'm making a career shift toward C# and, overall, I like C# better. One issue I'm having, though, is curly brace soup. In VB, each structure keyword has a matching close keyword, for example: Namespace ... Class ... Function ... For ... Using ... If ... ... End If If ... ... End If End Using Next End Function End Class End Namespace The same code written in C# ends up very hard to read: namespace ... { class ... { function ... { for ... { using ... { if ... { ... } if ... { ... } } } // wait... what level is this? } } } Being so used to VB, I'm wondering if there's a technique employed by c-style programmers to improve readability and to ensure that your code ends up in the correct "block". The above example is relatively easy to read, but sometimes at the end of a piece of code I'll have 8 or more levels of curly braces, requiring me to scroll up several pages to figure out which brace ends the block I'm interested in.

    Read the article

  • Scaling along an arbitrary axis (Dealing with non-uniform scale)

    - by Jon
    I'm trying to build my own little engine to get more familiar with the concepts of 3D programming. I have a transform class that on each frame it creates a Scaling Matrix (S), a Rotation Matrix from a Quaternion (R) and concatenates them together (S*R). Once i have SR, I insert the translation values into the bottom of the three columns. So i end up with a transformation matrix that looks like: [SR SR SR 0] [SR SR SR 0] [SR SR SR 0] [tx ty tz 1] This works perfectly in all cases except when rotating an object that has a non-uniform scale. For example a unit cube with ScaleX = 4, ScaleY = 2, ScaleZ = 1 will give me a rectangular box that is 4 times as wide as the depth and twice as high as the depth. If i then translate this around, the box stays the same and looks normal. The problem happens whenever I try to rotate this scaled box. The shape itself becomes distorted and it appears as though the Scale factors are affecting the object on the World X,Y,Z axis rather than the local X,Y,Z axis of the object. I've done some pretty extensive research through a variety of textbooks (Eberly, Moller/Hoffman, Phar etc) and there isn't a ton there to go off of. Online, most of the answers say to avoid non-uniform scaling which I understand the desire to avoid it, but I'd still like to figure out how to support it. The only thing I can think off is that when constructing a Scale Matrix: [sx 0 0 0] [0 sy 0 0] [0 0 sz 0] [0 0 0 1] This is scaling along the World Axis instead of the object's local Direction, Up and Right vectors or it's local Z, Y, X axis. Does anyone have any tips or ideas on how to handle construction a transformation matrix that allows for non-uniform scaling and rotation? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Dealing with bad/incomplete/unclear specifications?

    - by eagerMoose
    I'm working on a project where our dev team gets the specifications from the business part of the company. Both the business management and the IT management require estimates and deadline projections, as they should. The good thing is that estimates are mostly made by the actual developers who get to do the required features. The bad thing is that the specifications are usually either too simple (it turns out you're left with a lot of question marks over your head because a lot of information seems to be missing) or too complex(up to the point that you can't even visualize where everything would "fit" in the app). More often than not, the business part of the specs are either incomplete or unaware of what can and can't be done (given the previously implemented business logic). Dev team is given about a day per new spec to give an estimate and we do try to clear uncertainties, usually by meeting up with whoever did the spec. Most of the times it turns out that spec writers haven't really thought everything through, and it's usually only when we start designing and developing that we end up in trouble, as a lot of the spec seems to have holes. How do you deal with this? Are you generous on estimates in advance?

    Read the article

  • Dealing with inflexible programmers.

    - by Singleton
    Sometimes programmers who work on a project for long time get inflexible, and it becomes difficult to reason with them. Even if we do manage to convince them, they can be unlikely to implement our suggestions. For instance, I recently joined a project where the build & release process is too complicated and has unnecessary roadblocks. I suggested that we get rid of some of the development overhead (like filling a few spreadsheets) just by integrating defect management and version control tools (both are IBM-Rational tools so integration can be a very easy one-off effort). Also, if we use tools like Maven & Ant (the project involves Java and some COTS products) build & release can be simplified which should reduce manual errors & intervention. I managed to convince others and I'm ready to put in the effort to develop a proof of concept. But the ‘Senior’ developer is not willing, possibly because the current process makes him more valuable. How do we handle this situation without developing friction in the team?

    Read the article

  • Dealing with three Windows partitions in dual boot installation

    - by Tim
    For dual-boot installation of Ubuntu after Windows. Quoted from ubuntuguide If a Windows boot partition exists as a second NTFS partition, it should be left alone. If there is a Windows recovery partition also installed, it can also be left alone as long as there are only two NTFS partitions total on the hard drive (i.e. there is no NTFS boot partition as well). If there are a total of 3 NTFS partitions on the hard drive, then the third Windows NTFS partition (the recovery partition) should be removed after creating Recovery CDs from it (see here). In the last case where Windows has three partitions, I was wondering why it says the recovery partition shall be removed? Is it possible to keep the three and create another extended partition with several logical partitions for installing Ubuntu and dual-booting the two OSes? I plan to dual-boot install Ubuntu 10.04 with existing Windows 7. Following is the layout of the current partitions of my hard drive viewed from Windows 7: So must I remove the Lenovo_Recovery (Q:) partition for the same reason you give for the first question? Thanks and regards!

    Read the article

  • Dealing with the node.js callback pyramid

    - by thecoop
    I've just started using node, and one thing I've quickly noticed is how quickly callbacks can build up to a silly level of indentation: doStuff(arg1, arg2, function(err, result) { doMoreStuff(arg3, arg4, function(err, result) { doEvenMoreStuff(arg5, arg6, function(err, result) { omgHowDidIGetHere(); }); }); }); The official style guide says to put each callback in a separate function, but that seems overly restrictive on the use of closures, and making a single object declared in the top level available several layers down, as the object has to be passed through all the intermediate callbacks. Is it ok to use function scope to help here? Put all the callback functions that need access to a global-ish object inside a function that declares that object, so it goes into a closure? function topLevelFunction(globalishObject, callback) { function doMoreStuffImpl(err, result) { doMoreStuff(arg5, arg6, function(err, result) { callback(null, globalishObject); }); } doStuff(arg1, arg2, doMoreStuffImpl); } and so on for several more layers... Or are there frameworks etc to help reduce the levels of indentation without declaring a named function for every single callback? How do you deal with the callback pyramid?

    Read the article

  • Dealing with frustration when things don't work.

    - by John Isaacks
    You ever try to implement something simple but for some strange reason it doesn't work. So you try a possible solution but then something else doesn't work. You keep trying different workarounds but every time something different isn't working. Every time you get one step closer you also get one (or more) step farther from solving this problem and its now been 3 hours when this should have taken you 10 minutes. And it still isn't solved. There is no one in your company who can help, and you are about to put your fist through your screen. At this point you are so frustrated you can no longer think about the problem clearly. What should you do at this point? Or what can you do to avoid reaching this point?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >