3 ms·
Furthermore, there is the opportunity cost of the site users. I had a job where I had to use IE for internal wiki's, whereas I used chrome and firefox for my ac
by diN0bot 17y ago
Furthermore, there is the opportunity cost of the site users. I had a job where I had to use IE for internal wiki's, whereas I used chrome and firefox for my actual work.
There was something seriously demoralizing about switching to IE to use an ugly, neigh unreadable and unusable wiki to document my beautiful work. i don't mean to get into a discussion on how good design and efficiency are coupled with beauty and elegance....suffice to say, i felt like the poor internal sites reflected the companies view of my work, represented our whole philosophical and prideful differences, and i ended that contract asap.
edit: ps - i accidently downvoted you when i meant to click reply AND agree with your good points. i know, it makes no sense. eit.
- makecheck 17y agoThat's an interesting point, that the company's opinion of employees is evident through their (lack of) IT investment. I have personally come to the decision that life is just too short to put up with Windows, and if I look for a job I intend to choose it based on the existence of Mac or Linux.
- pavel_lishin 17y agoI probably waste 15 minutes a day on BaseCamp's UI - it's not great, and I've written a few greasemonkey extensions to speed up my process. And that's a 37 signals product, a pretty decent one to boot. I can't imagine how much time (for instance) my friend loses to his stupid internal IE6 app that was probably outsourced to a fourteen yea rold.