In our technological age, a large percentage of the population is becoming more familiar with computers. This is largely because of information technology careers. Computer-based positions have flooded the job market in the last decade.
If you decide to acquire degrees in computer science, programming or software, you will have a good chance of succeeding. Trends have shown that this field is constantly expanding. These days, it’s a good idea to get involved with new-age computer hardware, software and the Internet.
Are you considering information technology careers? Millions of new students are going to information technology colleges all over the country every year. This is one of the best bets when it comes to useful degrees. I'm not dismissing other degree programs; however some of them tend to lead graduates to nowhere.
Many people are finding it difficult to find good paying jobs with their Liberal Arts degree. I'm not saying that it's worthless, but opportunities with information technology careers are much more numerous than art-based career openings.
You can easily find the most sought after jobs on the Internet. If you pop open your Google search engine and check it out, you can easily bring up websites like CareerBuilder.com and Monster.com.
You can then type in the job of your choice, such as nursing, law, freelance writing or information technology careers and you will be rewarded with numerous career opportunities.
Since my brother was looking for a job up north, I did a search a few days ago. I took it upon myself to check out the current information technology careers available.
I was able to come up with several options within a few minutes. I saved the links and emailed them to my brother. There are plenty to choose from when it comes to information technology careers.
It doesn’t matter if you're looking for a job down south, in the Midwest, or on the west coast, you are sure to spot something worth your while. Hop on your computer today and check out the Internet for all the requirements for information technology careers. Your dream job may just be at your fingertips
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Managing Information Technology (IT) Projects
If a bug or defect were found in a software after its release into the market, it would not only entail huge redevelopment costs for the company, but could also lead to the erosion of brand name and reputation.
This is why it has become necessary even for IT companies to use time-tested quality improvement techniques such as Six Sigma.
Six Sigma Tools for IT Companies
There are many Six Sigma tools that can be used for managing IT projects, but the tool that is most commonly utilized by IT companies is the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). This tool is used for unraveling potential fault lines within the product design, allowing developers to get a glimpse of things to come and consequently focus their efforts on eliminating the potential bugs or defects.
This tool is quite effective because it can be utilized for managing almost all types of IT projects including product development, product enhancement, and product maintenance.
How to Use FMEA
Using FMEA is not all that difficult, because all that needs to be done is to become as pessimistic as possible. IT companies that are using FMEA first need to identify all the different ways in which the selected product, service or process could go wrong. After identifying all the potential defects, the project team then tries to assess the probability of each defect, something that is referred to as "occurrence". The project team also assesses the overall impact of such defects, referred to as "severity" and the probability of finding appropriate solutions for such defects before the final delivery, referred to as "detention".
All the three parameters mentioned above are ranked on a scale of 1 to 10 after which the ranks are added up to get a 'risk priority number' (RPN). RPN makes it easier for the project team to identify the most risky areas that need to be attended on a priority basis.
The next step in the FMEA process involves conducting brainstorming sessions so as to find the most appropriate solutions for the potential bugs or defects. At this stage, the project team members need to focus on developing alternatives rather than trying to meddle with the developed product, service or process, something that can create more problems.
The project team members also need to focus their efforts on developing executable solutions rather than wasting their energies on defining new possibilities that sound like mere wish lists. For devising effective solutions, the team can make use of FMEA process charts that can be updated to display the progress being made.
For the best results, it is recommended that FMEA be conducted at the beginning of every IT project and every three months thereafter. FMEA can be used at any stage, but it is always better to start early because early detection of potential bugs and defects is vital for a company planning to make it big in the highly competitive IT sector.
This is why it has become necessary even for IT companies to use time-tested quality improvement techniques such as Six Sigma.
Six Sigma Tools for IT Companies
There are many Six Sigma tools that can be used for managing IT projects, but the tool that is most commonly utilized by IT companies is the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). This tool is used for unraveling potential fault lines within the product design, allowing developers to get a glimpse of things to come and consequently focus their efforts on eliminating the potential bugs or defects.
This tool is quite effective because it can be utilized for managing almost all types of IT projects including product development, product enhancement, and product maintenance.
How to Use FMEA
Using FMEA is not all that difficult, because all that needs to be done is to become as pessimistic as possible. IT companies that are using FMEA first need to identify all the different ways in which the selected product, service or process could go wrong. After identifying all the potential defects, the project team then tries to assess the probability of each defect, something that is referred to as "occurrence". The project team also assesses the overall impact of such defects, referred to as "severity" and the probability of finding appropriate solutions for such defects before the final delivery, referred to as "detention".
All the three parameters mentioned above are ranked on a scale of 1 to 10 after which the ranks are added up to get a 'risk priority number' (RPN). RPN makes it easier for the project team to identify the most risky areas that need to be attended on a priority basis.
The next step in the FMEA process involves conducting brainstorming sessions so as to find the most appropriate solutions for the potential bugs or defects. At this stage, the project team members need to focus on developing alternatives rather than trying to meddle with the developed product, service or process, something that can create more problems.
The project team members also need to focus their efforts on developing executable solutions rather than wasting their energies on defining new possibilities that sound like mere wish lists. For devising effective solutions, the team can make use of FMEA process charts that can be updated to display the progress being made.
For the best results, it is recommended that FMEA be conducted at the beginning of every IT project and every three months thereafter. FMEA can be used at any stage, but it is always better to start early because early detection of potential bugs and defects is vital for a company planning to make it big in the highly competitive IT sector.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Technology Reviews On Mobile And Advanced Voip Services
Nokia with Internet Service Provider (ISP) CBN and producer of network CISCO cooperate in optimizing implementation of VOIP (Voice over IP) technology what is loaded in Nokia E65, E61I and E90 Communicator cellular phone.
If this economic alternative communications via internet succeed to get the positive response from consumer, Nokia also will invite the other ISP to apply this Technology.
One of service carried by Nokia for Nokia E65, E61I and E90 Communicator user is attend the application of VOIP Setting Wizards. Application made by InTouch claimed by Nokia will very assistive configuration of VOIP base on the Session Initial Protocol (SIP). With VOIP technology in the cellular phone, user can make international call conversation, national, and other user of service provider with the economical tariff, even free of charge certain in a condition. This application is obtainable at Nokia Professional centre, Nokia Sales and Care Centre closest.
Pocket PC, Smartphone and other Windows Mobile based Communication Gadget also powering by VoIP technlogy. But of course you must install third party software wich usually called softphone (Software Phone) before use it. Many alternative of softphone you can get easily, such as SJPhone. The latest version of SJPhone you can download at http://sjlabs.com/sjp.html.
Whatever you like, using Nokia or your Windows Mobile Pocket PC it is recommended to try this alternative communication technology.
If this economic alternative communications via internet succeed to get the positive response from consumer, Nokia also will invite the other ISP to apply this Technology.
One of service carried by Nokia for Nokia E65, E61I and E90 Communicator user is attend the application of VOIP Setting Wizards. Application made by InTouch claimed by Nokia will very assistive configuration of VOIP base on the Session Initial Protocol (SIP). With VOIP technology in the cellular phone, user can make international call conversation, national, and other user of service provider with the economical tariff, even free of charge certain in a condition. This application is obtainable at Nokia Professional centre, Nokia Sales and Care Centre closest.
Pocket PC, Smartphone and other Windows Mobile based Communication Gadget also powering by VoIP technlogy. But of course you must install third party software wich usually called softphone (Software Phone) before use it. Many alternative of softphone you can get easily, such as SJPhone. The latest version of SJPhone you can download at http://sjlabs.com/sjp.html.
Whatever you like, using Nokia or your Windows Mobile Pocket PC it is recommended to try this alternative communication technology.
Technology Reviews On Patent Royalty
The article mentioned a possible gambit by the state of California to ensure cooperation among researchers of different states. The oversight committee of California's CIRM recently announced that any California researchers who develop patented discoveries using California state funds must share their patents with other state researchers. Ed Penhoet of CIRM was quoted: "We hope WARF will reciprocate." Of course, one issue is that WARF presently has patents related to embyronic stem cells, and CIRM does not. Further, one would need to know details of what is shared. Does the sharing only pertain to the use by researchers in academic institutions, or does it extend to companies created by such researchers? One of the prime selling points to voters of states such as California and New Jersey was that the state funding research would recover expended money through patent royalties. If everyone gets a free license, such a recovery is unlikely to happen.
The article goes through the world of patent useage as among different patent-holding universities. Universities generally allow other institutions to use patented technologies without special permission. The litigated case of Madey v. Duke University is an exception to this general rule, although it was a patent-holding professor who sued a university. Furthermore, WARF requires universities to get a license to do embryonic stem cell research. "None of us understand why we need a license...Why is this technology any different?" says one technology-transfer official. The license of WARF to the University of California, for example, permits scientists to use only a small number of embryonic stem cell lines. And the license granted to the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, a nonprofit medical research organization that funds scientists across the nation, prohibits scientists from accepting funding from or collaborating with commercial companies unless the company has a commercial license from WARF.
The article presents an interesting quote by Jeanne Loring, who herself is an author of an article criticizing the WARF patent royalty demand [311 Science 1716 (2006)]: Jeanne Loring, a scientist at the Burnham Institute for Medical Research in La Jolla, CA, started a short-lived embryonic stem cell company several years ago. "I learned from venture capital investors that these patents existed and that it would be impossible to obtain funding from them," she says. This quote is significant for at least two reasons. First, one sees that venture capitalists were aware of the Thomson/WARF patents and saw them as a show-stopper as to VC investment in the field. Thus, as to small research entities spurning money from CIRM over disputes about patent royalty rights, one suspects such small entities do NOT have VC funding as a viable alternative. I suspect the length of time before payout is separately a showstopper as to VC funding; nothing here looks ready for commercialization within seven years, a typical VC benchmark. Second, in the world of Bayh-Dole, it's kind of scary that one professor/entrepreneur would not know of relevant patents of a Bayh-Dole grantee. Further, it's also scary that CIRM apparently had not anticipated the WARF play, which failure is somewhat hard to fathom since the basic patent issued years ago.
The basic WARF/Thomson patent is US 5,843,780 (issued 1 Dec 1998 to James A. Thomson, based on application 591246 filed 18 Jan 1996; the application was a continuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No. 08/376,327 filed Jan. 20, 1995. It was obtained with funding from the federal NIH, and thus represents a patent obtainted through the auspices of the Bayh-Dole Act. It is separately true that Thomson, a few days after filing his basic patent application, submitted a paper to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which appeared as 92 PNAS 7844 (1995). His effort at patenting did not impede his efforts at rapid public disclosure.
Kenneth Taymor, an attorney with the Stanford Program on Stem Cells in Society, is quoted in the article: "The more that WARF presses its rights, the more research will be impinged and the more likely it will move offshore." This boogeyman won't hunt. In a different variant, research was going to move offshore after Bush's restriction in 2001.
Taymor and the article author Emily Singer simply neglect to mention the role that 35 USC 271(e)(1) is going to play in research on embryonic stem cells. Therapies arising from embryonic stem cells are going to need FDA approval. Work done to meet FDA requirements is insulated from infringement liability through the safe harbor of 271(e)(1), as expansively interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Merck v. Integra.
Issues discussed in the present article are related to those mentioned in Ebert, Lawrence. (2006, April 13). Will Wisconsin's Patents Block Embryonic Stem Cell Research?. EzineArticles. Retrieved April 24, 2006, from http://ezinearticles.com/?id=178431 and Ebert, Lawrence. (2006, April 12). Los Angeles Times Article Way Off Base on Stem Cell Issues. EzineArticles. Retrieved April 24, 2006, from http://ezinearticles.com/?Los-Angeles-Times-Article-Way-Off-Base-on-Stem-Cell-Issues&id=178050.
The article goes through the world of patent useage as among different patent-holding universities. Universities generally allow other institutions to use patented technologies without special permission. The litigated case of Madey v. Duke University is an exception to this general rule, although it was a patent-holding professor who sued a university. Furthermore, WARF requires universities to get a license to do embryonic stem cell research. "None of us understand why we need a license...Why is this technology any different?" says one technology-transfer official. The license of WARF to the University of California, for example, permits scientists to use only a small number of embryonic stem cell lines. And the license granted to the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, a nonprofit medical research organization that funds scientists across the nation, prohibits scientists from accepting funding from or collaborating with commercial companies unless the company has a commercial license from WARF.
The article presents an interesting quote by Jeanne Loring, who herself is an author of an article criticizing the WARF patent royalty demand [311 Science 1716 (2006)]: Jeanne Loring, a scientist at the Burnham Institute for Medical Research in La Jolla, CA, started a short-lived embryonic stem cell company several years ago. "I learned from venture capital investors that these patents existed and that it would be impossible to obtain funding from them," she says. This quote is significant for at least two reasons. First, one sees that venture capitalists were aware of the Thomson/WARF patents and saw them as a show-stopper as to VC investment in the field. Thus, as to small research entities spurning money from CIRM over disputes about patent royalty rights, one suspects such small entities do NOT have VC funding as a viable alternative. I suspect the length of time before payout is separately a showstopper as to VC funding; nothing here looks ready for commercialization within seven years, a typical VC benchmark. Second, in the world of Bayh-Dole, it's kind of scary that one professor/entrepreneur would not know of relevant patents of a Bayh-Dole grantee. Further, it's also scary that CIRM apparently had not anticipated the WARF play, which failure is somewhat hard to fathom since the basic patent issued years ago.
The basic WARF/Thomson patent is US 5,843,780 (issued 1 Dec 1998 to James A. Thomson, based on application 591246 filed 18 Jan 1996; the application was a continuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No. 08/376,327 filed Jan. 20, 1995. It was obtained with funding from the federal NIH, and thus represents a patent obtainted through the auspices of the Bayh-Dole Act. It is separately true that Thomson, a few days after filing his basic patent application, submitted a paper to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which appeared as 92 PNAS 7844 (1995). His effort at patenting did not impede his efforts at rapid public disclosure.
Kenneth Taymor, an attorney with the Stanford Program on Stem Cells in Society, is quoted in the article: "The more that WARF presses its rights, the more research will be impinged and the more likely it will move offshore." This boogeyman won't hunt. In a different variant, research was going to move offshore after Bush's restriction in 2001.
Taymor and the article author Emily Singer simply neglect to mention the role that 35 USC 271(e)(1) is going to play in research on embryonic stem cells. Therapies arising from embryonic stem cells are going to need FDA approval. Work done to meet FDA requirements is insulated from infringement liability through the safe harbor of 271(e)(1), as expansively interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Merck v. Integra.
Issues discussed in the present article are related to those mentioned in Ebert, Lawrence. (2006, April 13). Will Wisconsin's Patents Block Embryonic Stem Cell Research?. EzineArticles. Retrieved April 24, 2006, from http://ezinearticles.com/?id=178431 and Ebert, Lawrence. (2006, April 12). Los Angeles Times Article Way Off Base on Stem Cell Issues. EzineArticles. Retrieved April 24, 2006, from http://ezinearticles.com/?Los-Angeles-Times-Article-Way-Off-Base-on-Stem-Cell-Issues&id=178050.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
latest Information On Bluetooth Technology
Do you like to know about the latest trends? Do you love the latest wireless and hands free technology? Do you want to know what is new in Bluetooth technology and how it works?
Bluetooth technology is a wireless type of technology. It allows you to talk on the telephone, totally hands free. It allows you to hookup your computer without any wires. It allows you to hook up your printers again, without wires. Yet, this technology is made to be inexpensive and to use low power, two more reasons why many people love this new technology and want to learn more about it.
If you are still confused, Bluetooth technology to put simply is a technology that allows you to be hooked up to both portable and fixed devices without any cables. This technology is also a short ranged and is being used worldwide.
Probably the most popular Bluetooth device is the cell phone. We all have seen those little objects behind people's ears as they talk, sometimes in what appears to be a one way conversation. Well, that little device allows them to be completely hands free. They are able to file reports, copy notes and drive a car more with more ease and more control.
This technology has grown so powerful that one Bluetooth enabled device is capable of being hooked up to a network of as many of seven other devices. This makes it easy to set up an office anywhere with ease and comfort. The office worker can easily talk on his/her wireless powered phone, while type on his blue tooth powered computer, receiving a fax from across the country and then adding a note into his PDA. It makes his/her work much simpler and much more organized.
Sometimes people will refer to this technology as a cable replacement technology. The reason is because it does essentially away with those sometimes annoying cables that get in our way.
Bluetooth technology runs off an inexpensive computer chip that is plugged into computers, phones, printers, fax machines, (anything that you wish to be wireless enabled). The information that was once carried by those cables is now carried by transmitting it using a special unique frequency that the chip will recognize. The chip will then read it and then relay the information to the computer, phone, printer, fax machine, etc.
The current products that use Bluetooth technology are the common ones: phones, computers, printers, fax machines, etc. It can also be used in automobiles as a voice activated communication and entertainment system for your phone or mp3 player. You speak a command and the system will perform it. The product is called Sync and it allows you make your Ipod voice activated. It will play a track your want, by speaking its name. The system does have to be factory installed.
Yet, this isn't where technology will stop. This new technology will continue to grow. What will be enabled next? Possibly, our entire homes will run through some sort of Bluetooth and voice powered technology. The ideas may be endless.
Keeping up with what is new in Bluetooth technology may prove to be a challenging endeavor because the innovations are growing at a fast pace.
Incident Preventing Technologies In Airports
While airports cannot plan for every event that influences successful airport ground operations, implementing proactive incident prevention technologies is important when growth and flight delays are expected to increase the potential for ground incursions. Facilitating consistent awareness in safety guidelines, assures that core ground safety deliveries are achieved cost effectively, sustains ROI on technology objectives, and simply save lives.
Here are some immediate business benefits and cost savings to plan for growth while sustaining ground safety technologies at optimum levels:
Maximum protection for a comprehensive loss prevention program and meeting ROI objectives: What the Technology Plan Should Accomplish
* Protection of the airport's most valued assets (ground personnel, vendors, contractors, flight & maintenance crews, and support equipment);
* Provide greater "security" through awareness of higher visibility safety solutions;
* Significantly reduce injuries and/or deaths while employees perform on the job;
* Protection of property assets from "damage" due to employee negligence;
* Protection from liability damages, lawsuits, and carelessness of employees;
* Reduction or elimination of insurance claims and worker's compensation claims;
* Proactive and preventative measures to secure dangerous high incident environments on the grounds;
* Potential reduction in insurance and business liability cost.
Airport administrators continue to evaluate the Total Cost of Ownership for FAA technology deployments, and influence on safer ground operations. Arriving at the conclusion that the rate-of-return justifies the investment in complex technologies requires steadfast prevention planning in a proactive manner while comparatively deploying higher visibility low-tech alternatives.
If airport administrators are spending 90% of their time "going after an increase in funding to secure complex technologies," considering effective low-tech alternatives could validate the desired return-on-investment with equally beneficial results. The events of 9/11 and subsequent changes in safety/security tactics created a "severe thorn" in the side of many airport administrators as well as created devastating losses for airlines.
Planning to succeed in all areas of airport administration is worth the time, effort, and investment in loss prevention planning, implementation, and technologies to secure airport ground operations costs effectively--is an excellent start.
Ground Incursion Technology Reviews:
"Technology Applications for Ground Incursion Avoidance...trust, but verify"
Most airport administrators rely heavily on technology recommendations from the FAA. While uniformity in operational guidelines has its benefits and make it easier to identify FAA compliance practices of airports, this is the traditional "top-down" approach to administration. The FAA consistently evaluates and test complex technology systems for ground incursion avoidance. Do you remember the famous statement by our great renowned late President Ronald Reagan, when he said, "Trust, but verify," relating to the Cold War, and more specifically, Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev and Soviet intentions.
Airport ground incursions are occurring at alarming rates annually, no single technology could possibly prevent all potential ground occurrences. Deploying low cost safety alternatives will assist airport management with modular (plug-the-gaps) approach to safe operations by evaluating each component of "incursion prevention technologies." So trust the FAA, but verify recommendations will in fact, provide the desired results.
Ultimately, as administrators, complex technology reviews are time consuming, requires advanced skills in engineering design and expertise, interpreting results, as well as contingency plans if the system ever fails, etc. Now, we all agree that something has to be done to address the many ground incursions that place lives and assets in harms way.
A Due Diligence Approach:
However, performing due diligence to ensure that such a system will perform as planned, should yield one important fact; complex systems will only perform as designed and in many instances, is limited in scope and application to fully prevent every ground incursion possibility.
Any technology plan that does not positively influence growth, profits, and operational stability, is a fertile attempt at long-term prosperity. Progressive planning goes hand-in-hand with loss prevention strategies and serves as a business agent for continuous ground safety improvements.
Proactive loss prevention planning should be the dominant force in any ground operations plan. Always striving to reduce costs without scarifying critical elements of operations that reduce stagnant safety measures, unfavorable returns on technology investments, and a reduction for the potential of ground incursions are essential priorities of administrators.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)