|
Motorcycles » uk.rec.motorcycles » OT: Net providers
| OT: Net providers [message #786890] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:09 |
|
I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
currently, the place has no land line (it's plumbed in but not
connected, so need to get BT on the case), and thus no broadband.
My question is, who should I be looking at? ADSLGuide has info,
obviously, but I'd like personal recommendations if possible. I could
just go with Zen again, but they're looking increasingly pricey these
days for what one gets; £30 including VAT for a 1 meg line, which is a
fair bit more than a lot of other folk. Now you get unlimited downloads,
and access to their unlimited binary newsfeed (which isn't that good a
binary newsfeed, if truth be told), but I'm still not convinced.
So are the rest rubbish and that's why they're cheap or have Zen got
greedy?
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786891 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:12 |
|
Bear wrote:
> I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
Is that for a job or a burd? I'm fairly sure it's not because you want
to be closer to TOG ;-)
--
Krusty.
http://www.muddystuff.co.uk
http://www.muddystuff.us
Off-road classifieds
'02 MV Senna '03 Tiger (FOYRNB) '96 Tiger '79 Fantic 250
|
|
|
| Re: Net providers [message #786892 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:13 |
|
"Bear" <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f256418d2d7ac9198a8cb [at] news.individual.de...
> I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
> currently, the place has no land line (it's plumbed in but not
> connected, so need to get BT on the case), and thus no broadband.
>
> My question is, who should I be looking at? ADSLGuide has info,
> obviously, but I'd like personal recommendations if possible. I could
> just go with Zen again, but they're looking increasingly pricey these
> days for what one gets; £30 including VAT for a 1 meg line, which is a
> fair bit more than a lot of other folk. Now you get unlimited downloads,
> and access to their unlimited binary newsfeed (which isn't that good a
> binary newsfeed, if truth be told), but I'm still not convinced.
>
> So are the rest rubbish and that's why they're cheap or have Zen got
> greedy?
I know a lot of people slag off BT but we use them for all our offsite
workers and find their business broadband works well, it's (I think) 29 quid
PCM for up to 8mb and no download limit.
--
Steve Parry
K100RS SE & F650
and a 520i SE Touring for comfort
http://www.gwynfryn.co.uk
|
|
|
| Re: Net providers [message #786893 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:14 |
|
"Bear" <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f256418d2d7ac9198a8cb [at] news.individual.de...
> I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
> currently, the place has no land line (it's plumbed in but not
> connected, so need to get BT on the case), and thus no broadband.
>
> My question is, who should I be looking at? ADSLGuide has info,
> obviously, but I'd like personal recommendations if possible. I could
> just go with Zen again, but they're looking increasingly pricey these
> days for what one gets; £30 including VAT for a 1 meg line, which is a
> fair bit more than a lot of other folk. Now you get unlimited downloads,
> and access to their unlimited binary newsfeed (which isn't that good a
> binary newsfeed, if truth be told), but I'm still not convinced.
>
> So are the rest rubbish and that's why they're cheap or have Zen got
> greedy?
Use Demon here, home user package is £20 a month, unlimited download, 2mb
(apparantly going up for free sometime soon). It's never dropped in almost
2 years, and apparantly the customer service is top notch. Also, after
ordering it was all working very quickly.
I'm sure as with all of these things other people have horror stories, but
they're been faultless here.
--
Dan
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786895 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:15 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786897 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:18 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786900 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:39 |
|
On 17 Jul 2006 09:12:43 GMT, Krusty said ...
> Bear wrote:
>
> > I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
>
> Is that for a job or a burd? I'm fairly sure it's not because you want
> to be closer to TOG ;-)
heh. Neither really. I've just been offered a stunning deal on a great
little place and it's very central, so the number of potential jobs is
greater.
I'm also toying with the idea of getting out of IT completely and trying
something else, but I'm slightly hampered by the fact I haven't a clue
what I want to do next. Something involved with biking would be great,
but I doubt jobs in the bike industry for 40 year olds with no previous
experience are thick on the ground. The flat is cheap enough that I
wouldn't have to do a megabucks IT job to cope, though. The only neg is
the parking, of which there's no off-street or garage, so I'll just keep
my Teutonic battle-bus and watch it get keyed to fuck :)
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: Net providers [message #786902 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:40 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 10:13:00 +0100, Steve Parry said ...
> "Bear" <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1f256418d2d7ac9198a8cb [at] news.individual.de...
> > I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
> > currently, the place has no land line (it's plumbed in but not
> > connected, so need to get BT on the case), and thus no broadband.
> >
> > My question is, who should I be looking at? ADSLGuide has info,
> > obviously, but I'd like personal recommendations if possible. I could
> > just go with Zen again, but they're looking increasingly pricey these
> > days for what one gets; £30 including VAT for a 1 meg line, which is a
> > fair bit more than a lot of other folk. Now you get unlimited downloads,
> > and access to their unlimited binary newsfeed (which isn't that good a
> > binary newsfeed, if truth be told), but I'm still not convinced.
> >
> > So are the rest rubbish and that's why they're cheap or have Zen got
> > greedy?
>
>
>
> I know a lot of people slag off BT but we use them for all our offsite
> workers and find their business broadband works well, it's (I think) 29 quid
> PCM for up to 8mb and no download limit.
Ok now that's a potential, cheers.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: Net providers [message #786903 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:40 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 10:14:13 +0100, DanTXD said ...
> "Bear" <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1f256418d2d7ac9198a8cb [at] news.individual.de...
> > I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
> > currently, the place has no land line (it's plumbed in but not
> > connected, so need to get BT on the case), and thus no broadband.
> >
> > My question is, who should I be looking at? ADSLGuide has info,
> > obviously, but I'd like personal recommendations if possible. I could
> > just go with Zen again, but they're looking increasingly pricey these
> > days for what one gets; £30 including VAT for a 1 meg line, which is a
> > fair bit more than a lot of other folk. Now you get unlimited downloads,
> > and access to their unlimited binary newsfeed (which isn't that good a
> > binary newsfeed, if truth be told), but I'm still not convinced.
> >
> > So are the rest rubbish and that's why they're cheap or have Zen got
> > greedy?
>
> Use Demon here, home user package is £20 a month, unlimited download, 2mb
> (apparantly going up for free sometime soon). It's never dropped in almost
> 2 years, and apparantly the customer service is top notch. Also, after
> ordering it was all working very quickly.
>
> I'm sure as with all of these things other people have horror stories, but
> they're been faultless here.
Ta. I'll add them to the list.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786904 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:41 |
|
On 17 Jul 2006 09:15:39 GMT, dwb said ...
> Bear wrote:
>
> > I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
> > currently, the place has no land line (it's plumbed in but not
> > connected, so need to get BT on the case), and thus no broadband.
> >
> > My question is, who should I be looking at? ADSLGuide has info,
> > obviously, but I'd like personal recommendations if possible. I could
> > just go with Zen again, but they're looking increasingly pricey these
> > days for what one gets; £30 including VAT for a 1 meg line, which is
> > a fair bit more than a lot of other folk. Now you get unlimited
> > downloads, and access to their unlimited binary newsfeed (which isn't
> > that good a binary newsfeed, if truth be told), but I'm still not
> > convinced.
> >
> > So are the rest rubbish and that's why they're cheap or have Zen got
> > greedy?
>
> Zen no longer offer the package you've mentioned, unless you're
> transferring an existing contract (which you might be - don't know).
>
> The latest offers are £24.99 for 8mb, with a 20GB cap.
Well that's them completely out of there picture then, ta :)
> Zen have always been very reliable and never drop off during busy
> times. I can't comment on the others having not used them, but VFM
> doesn't seem bad with Zen.
They were great elsewhere, and have been totally *shit* here. Their
customer support/sales side seem to not give a flying fuck either, at
least that's my experience of them of late.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786906 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:48 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786909 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:51 |
|
Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
I thought you'd said you'd never live in London. Or was that someone
else?
--
d.
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786911 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 11:54 |
|
"dwb" <parc_erom_tey [at] crossdata.co.uk> wrote:
>Bear wrote:
>
>> I'm also toying with the idea of getting out of IT completely and
>> trying something else, but I'm slightly hampered by the fact I
>> haven't a clue what I want to do next. Something involved with biking
>> would be great, but I doubt jobs in the bike industry for 40 year
>> olds with no previous experience are thick on the ground.
>
>I would have thought PM skills are transferable to other sectors -
they are, but...
>especially if you've got some recognised methodologies [1]- I know this
>will sound daft, but tried sounding out construction firms or the like?
there are lots and lots of "technical" things to know about PMing in
the construction business, unfortunately (this is what my SO does[1],
so I hear about it a lot more than I'd like)
>[1] yes I know, having a piece of paper isn't really worth much, except
>to the person who thinks they are.
Well, exactly, and it's why I'm doing the Prince 2 Practitioners
course/exam in a few weeks time, despite not being a project manager.
[1] well, used to, she's a programme manager now, but in the same
field.
--
d.
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786913 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:04 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786914 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:06 |
|
"darsy" <darsy [at] sticky.co.uk> wrote in message
news:mcnmb2927um756e2rg2uesimmr4c4mfg5k [at] 4ax.com...
> Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
>
> I thought you'd said you'd never live in London. Or was that someone
> else?
>
Shhh he's down to put the hit on ST ;)
--
Steve Parry
K100RS SE & F650
and a 520i SE Touring for comfort
http://www.gwynfryn.co.uk
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786916 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:09 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786918 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:09 |
|
On 17 Jul 2006 09:48:41 GMT, dwb said ...
> Bear wrote:
>
> > I'm also toying with the idea of getting out of IT completely and
> > trying something else, but I'm slightly hampered by the fact I
> > haven't a clue what I want to do next. Something involved with biking
> > would be great, but I doubt jobs in the bike industry for 40 year
> > olds with no previous experience are thick on the ground.
>
> I would have thought PM skills are transferable to other sectors -
> especially if you've got some recognised methodologies [1]- I know this
> will sound daft, but tried sounding out construction firms or the like?
Really don't fancy construction.
I'd like to get more into something soft-skills management-flavoured,
but what? No idea.
Or bikes. I like bikes. Or cars. Or something that involves naked women,
but not pimping.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786920 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:10 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 10:51:37 +0100, darsy said ...
> Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
>
> I thought you'd said you'd never live in London. Or was that someone
> else?
No idea. Could have been. But this was too good a chance to pass up.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786921 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:11 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786924 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:23 |
|
Bear wrote:
> I'd like to get more into something soft-skills management-flavoured,
> but what? No idea.
>
> Or bikes. I like bikes. Or cars. Or something that involves naked women,
> but not pimping.
Thought about setting a modelling agency?
HTH
Dave
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786925 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:25 |
|
On 17 Jul 2006 10:11:39 GMT, dwb said ...
> Bear wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to get more into something soft-skills management-flavoured,
> > but what? No idea.
> >
> > Or bikes. I like bikes. Or cars. Or something that involves naked
> > women, but not pimping.
>
> Photography?
Now that's a good suggestion ... I'm a bit hampered by being 40 and
really knowing only one thing (ie IT Project Management), but then
others have switched careers before and made it work ... anyway, Im
going to get plenty of thinking time soon so I'll have to have a good
think and see what appeals.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786929 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:35 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:25:18 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>On 17 Jul 2006 10:11:39 GMT, dwb said ...
>> Photography?
>
>Now that's a good suggestion ... I'm a bit hampered by being 40
Christ, are you really that young?
--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786932 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:38 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 12:35:26 +0200, Ace said ...
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:25:18 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On 17 Jul 2006 10:11:39 GMT, dwb said ...
>
> >> Photography?
> >
> >Now that's a good suggestion ... I'm a bit hampered by being 40
>
> Christ, are you really that young?
Ah, the master of wit and repartee ... and people wonder why I don't
bother with ukrm much these days.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786935 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:42 |
|
"dwb" <parc_erom_tey [at] crossdata.co.uk> wrote:
>darsy wrote:
>>
>> Well, exactly, and it's why I'm doing the Prince 2 Practitioners
>> course/exam in a few weeks time, despite not being a project manager.
>
>How is the pointy hair coming along?
I have basically no hair on my head at all these days.
--
d.
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786939 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:46 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:38:31 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 12:35:26 +0200, Ace said ...
>> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:25:18 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >Now that's a good suggestion ... I'm a bit hampered by being 40
>>
>> Christ, are you really that young?
>
>Ah, the master of wit and repartee ...
Oh FFS, talk about sensitive.
On the plus side, I do seem, quite unintentionally, to have mastered
the art of getting right up your nose. So for those interested, I'll
be running interactive bear-baiting classes at only a grand a head in
the near future.
>and people wonder why I don't bother with ukrm much these days.
Heh. Despite the claim, you obviously are getting old if you can't
even cope with rank amateurs like me anymore.
--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786940 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:48 |
|
Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 10:51:37 +0100, darsy said ...
>> Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
>>
>> I thought you'd said you'd never live in London. Or was that someone
>> else?
>
>No idea. Could have been. But this was too good a chance to pass up.
I think I was mixing you up with Ginge or some other northern-monkey.
Sorry.
--
d.
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786941 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:48 |
|
Ace wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:25:18 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 17 Jul 2006 10:11:39 GMT, dwb said ...
>
> >> Photography?
> >
> > Now that's a good suggestion ... I'm a bit hampered by being 40
>
> Christ, are you really that young?
I turned 37 on Friday.
--
Cab :^) - argue's like a girl
GSX 1400
UKRMMA#10 (KOTL), IbW#015, BoB#4, POTM#3, SKA#1
email addy : ukrm_dot_cab_at_rosbif_dot_org
http://www.rosbif.org
The gingeometer: http://www.rosbif.org/ukrm/gingeometer/
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786943 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:53 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:48:10 +0100, darsy said ...
> Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 10:51:37 +0100, darsy said ...
> >> Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
> >>
> >> I thought you'd said you'd never live in London. Or was that someone
> >> else?
> >
> >No idea. Could have been. But this was too good a chance to pass up.
>
> I think I was mixing you up with Ginge or some other northern-monkey.
Fuck. That's harsh.
I really didn't want to move back to London again because I hate the
commuting, but this is central enough that I don't think it's going to
be an issue.
> Sorry.
I should think so too. Jesus man, there are limits.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786947 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 12:58 |
|
In article <gmqmb25reqqqf3of0hflr4fsf584icpsh6 [at] 4ax.com>, darsy says...
> Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 10:51:37 +0100, darsy said ...
> >> Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
> >>
> >> I thought you'd said you'd never live in London. Or was that someone
> >> else?
> >
> >No idea. Could have been. But this was too good a chance to pass up.
>
> I think I was mixing you up with Ginge or some other northern-monkey.
I'd actually consider a move to London if I was earning enough to make
an extra 200k's worth of mortgage "invisible".
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786949 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 13:04 |
|
Bear wrote:
> I'm shortly (like in the next 2 weeks) moving to a flat in SW London;
> currently, the place has no land line (it's plumbed in but not
> connected, so need to get BT on the case), and thus no broadband.
>
> My question is, who should I be looking at? ADSLGuide has info,
> obviously, but I'd like personal recommendations if possible. I could
> just go with Zen again, but they're looking increasingly pricey these
> days for what one gets; £30 including VAT for a 1 meg line, which is a
> fair bit more than a lot of other folk. Now you get unlimited downloads,
> and access to their unlimited binary newsfeed (which isn't that good a
> binary newsfeed, if truth be told), but I'm still not convinced.
>
> So are the rest rubbish and that's why they're cheap or have Zen got
> greedy?
It looks like it's BT.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5181524.stm
I might give them another try myself (I left them some years ago because
their newsfeed was absolute shite, but they've had plenty of time to
improve)
--
Joe
VN1500 Classic FI (with added sparkle)
pikeyjoe ~at~ kinghell.com
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786952 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 13:09 |
|
ginge <the.gingeREMOVE [at] THISgmail.com > wrote:
>In article <gmqmb25reqqqf3of0hflr4fsf584icpsh6 [at] 4ax.com>, darsy says...
>> I think I was mixing you up with Ginge or some other northern-monkey.
>
>I'd actually consider a move to London if I was earning enough to make
>an extra 200k's worth of mortgage "invisible".
what, so an extra grand or so net of taxes per month? I've no idea
what you actually do - other than "something ITish" - but I should
have thought that was readily achievable, that's only an additional
20-25K per annum.
Of course, the other easy course of action to achieve higher mortgage
affordability isn't really open to you[1] :-/
[1] you could always try "Stars in the Skies"[2], of course.
[2] yes, this is the same insult I used in the "Paging WC post"
earlier - I think it's still got some mileage
--
d.
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786970 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 14:10 |
|
Bear wrote:
> They were great elsewhere, and have been totally *shit* here. Their
> customer support/sales side seem to not give a flying fuck either, at
> least that's my experience of them of late.
In your current situation you might want to consider Carphonewhorehouse
and the Talk Talk package which bundles (so called) free broadband with
telephone. For music downloads and Usenet I expect it is quite
sufficient. Normally I'd do you a buckshee line but as you know it's
awkward ATM. If that changes then I will do so.
On the job front I would say that being based there, with IT and PM
skills and experience, you are going to drop right into somewhere. Even
6 years ago people were desperate and it has got harder since for people
to re-locate into London. Find something in what you know then if you
still want to change look out from a stable base.
IIRC the computer press were a decent source of job ads. If you will
take permie at £50k, even just interim, it should be straightforward.
You gotta sell the Beemer if you are going to live there, it's a
liability. There must be some way or somewhere to secure a bike in the
vicinity. Failing that there has to be a UKRM'r with yardage within
reasonable distance.
--
Hog
'96 Bastard12 '89 R100RS '81 XS650 '78 RD400
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786975 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 14:37 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:10:30 +0100, Hog said ...
> Bear wrote:
>
> > They were great elsewhere, and have been totally *shit* here. Their
> > customer support/sales side seem to not give a flying fuck either, at
> > least that's my experience of them of late.
>
> In your current situation you might want to consider Carphonewhorehouse
> and the Talk Talk package which bundles (so called) free broadband with
> telephone. For music downloads and Usenet I expect it is quite
> sufficient. Normally I'd do you a buckshee line but as you know it's
> awkward ATM. If that changes then I will do so.
Cheers mate ... the only problem with the CW deal is that, IIRC, the
contracts are for quite a while; ideally I'd like something monthly for
the moment, until I know what I'm doing and when :)
> On the job front I would say that being based there, with IT and PM
> skills and experience, you are going to drop right into somewhere. Even
> 6 years ago people were desperate and it has got harder since for people
> to re-locate into London. Find something in what you know then if you
> still want to change look out from a stable base.
TBH I just don't think I'm cut out for the whole corporate whore thing;
my style of PM'ing isn't based on accepted or best practice, it's done
much more from the gut. Oh sure, I've got loads of experience with
things like PRINCE2 and the like, and use those tools just fine, but
from what I've seen of the larger corporates and their attitude towards
PM'ing it strikes me that 90% of PMs don't actually have a fucking clue
a) how to get the best from people and b) how to actually *deliver*;
it's all based around ticks in boxes so someone else gets the blame when
it goes wrong, rather than trying to work /with/ people to make sure it
doesn't go shit-shaped in the first place.
> IIRC the computer press were a decent source of job ads. If you will
> take permie at £50k, even just interim, it should be straightforward.
You'd think, eh, but I've been to a few of those sort of interviews and
frankly my face doesn't fit. It's not that I can't do the job (my last
few projects have seen me deliver where a lot of others have failed)
it's more that I can't do it their way, because their way involves
pressurising people aggressively and that's simply not the way I choose
to work. But we'll see. A small company maybe, or maybe even something
charity related. Not sure. I'll give it all some thought once I've moved
and settled.
> You gotta sell the Beemer if you are going to live there, it's a
> liability. There must be some way or somewhere to secure a bike in the
> vicinity. Failing that there has to be a UKRM'r with yardage within
> reasonable distance.
I'll be paying council tax there so I'll get a resident's parking
permit, though it might take a while to arrange ... there are some bike
bays in the area as well and I'll certainly have a look at scoring an
older POS bike once I settle; much easier to get around London on and I
can let my dispatching skills loose on London traffic again :)
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786980 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 14:44 |
|
Bear wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:10:30 +0100, Hog said ...
>> On the job front I would say that being based there, with IT and PM
>> skills and experience, you are going to drop right into somewhere.
>> Even 6 years ago people were desperate and it has got harder since
>> for people to re-locate into London. Find something in what you know
>> then if you still want to change look out from a stable base.
>
> TBH I just don't think I'm cut out for the whole corporate whore
> thing; my style of PM'ing isn't based on accepted or best practice,
> it's done much more from the gut. Oh sure, I've got loads of
> experience with things like PRINCE2 and the like, and use those tools
> just fine, but from what I've seen of the larger corporates and their
> attitude towards PM'ing it strikes me that 90% of PMs don't actually
> have a fucking clue a) how to get the best from people and b) how to
> actually *deliver*; it's all based around ticks in boxes so someone
> else gets the blame when it goes wrong, rather than trying to work
> /with/ people to make sure it doesn't go shit-shaped in the first
> place.
I wasn't talking big corporates. Smaller companies abound and if
anything find it harder to get staff
>> IIRC the computer press were a decent source of job ads. If you will
>> take permie at £50k, even just interim, it should be straightforward.
>
> You'd think, eh, but I've been to a few of those sort of interviews
> and frankly my face doesn't fit. It's not that I can't do the job (my
> last few projects have seen me deliver where a lot of others have
> failed) it's more that I can't do it their way, because their way
> involves pressurising people aggressively and that's simply not the
> way I choose to work. But we'll see. A small company maybe, or maybe
> even something charity related. Not sure. I'll give it all some
> thought once I've moved and settled.
Smaller IT companies, or smaller companies with internal IT capacity,
are usually pretty short on established procedure and would fit better.
Someone in here must know of a decent London recruitment agent (if such
a thing exists).
--
Hog
'96 Bastard12 '89 R100RS '81 XS650 '78 RD400
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786983 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 14:50 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:44:42 +0100, Hog said ...
> Bear wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:10:30 +0100, Hog said ...
>
> >> On the job front I would say that being based there, with IT and PM
> >> skills and experience, you are going to drop right into somewhere.
> >> Even 6 years ago people were desperate and it has got harder since
> >> for people to re-locate into London. Find something in what you know
> >> then if you still want to change look out from a stable base.
> >
> > TBH I just don't think I'm cut out for the whole corporate whore
> > thing; my style of PM'ing isn't based on accepted or best practice,
> > it's done much more from the gut. Oh sure, I've got loads of
> > experience with things like PRINCE2 and the like, and use those tools
> > just fine, but from what I've seen of the larger corporates and their
> > attitude towards PM'ing it strikes me that 90% of PMs don't actually
> > have a fucking clue a) how to get the best from people and b) how to
> > actually *deliver*; it's all based around ticks in boxes so someone
> > else gets the blame when it goes wrong, rather than trying to work
> > /with/ people to make sure it doesn't go shit-shaped in the first
> > place.
>
> I wasn't talking big corporates. Smaller companies abound and if
> anything find it harder to get staff
I'll have a look once I'm settled ... although I'll probably find an
Internet cafe to continue job-hunting once I've moved, rather than wait
for a line to become enabled.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786984 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 14:52 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:37:18 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>TBH I just don't think I'm cut out for the whole corporate whore thing;
>my style of PM'ing isn't based on accepted or best practice, it's done
>much more from the gut. Oh sure, I've got loads of experience with
>things like PRINCE2 and the like, and use those tools just fine, but
>from what I've seen of the larger corporates and their attitude towards
>PM'ing it strikes me that 90% of PMs don't actually have a fucking clue
>a) how to get the best from people and b) how to actually *deliver*;
>it's all based around ticks in boxes so someone else gets the blame when
>it goes wrong, rather than trying to work /with/ people to make sure it
>doesn't go shit-shaped in the first place.
I think you've described the difference between managing people and
managing projects. Good people managers are incredibly rare, and it
seems to be impossible to teach/learn how to do it. I'm doing it
myself now, and finding it way harder than the semi-tech stuff I've
done for the last 25 years.
We have a lot of people, especially developers, who work from home 1
or 2 days a week here. Which is great, normally. But we've got a big
deadline on Friday this week, and hitting it will require everybody
talking to everybody else, all the time, so I've just sent an email
telling the two developers they have to be in the rest of this week.
It took me ages to word it, and I still feel like a shit. But I guess
my job is not to be their mate.
--
Champ
ZX10R
GPz750turbo
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786986 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 14:59 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786987 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 15:01 |
|
Champ wrote:
> We have a lot of people, especially developers, who work from home 1
> or 2 days a week here. Which is great, normally. But we've got a big
> deadline on Friday this week, and hitting it will require everybody
> talking to everybody else, all the time, so I've just sent an email
> telling the two developers they have to be in the rest of this week.
> It took me ages to word it, and I still feel like a shit. But I guess
> my job is not to be their mate.
It doesn't seem unreasonable. If the customer isn't satisfied people
don't get paid.
--
Hog
'96 Bastard12 '89 R100RS '81 XS650 '78 RD400
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786992 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 15:08 |
|
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:52:19 +0100, Champ said ...
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:37:18 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear [at] gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >TBH I just don't think I'm cut out for the whole corporate whore thing;
> >my style of PM'ing isn't based on accepted or best practice, it's done
> >much more from the gut. Oh sure, I've got loads of experience with
> >things like PRINCE2 and the like, and use those tools just fine, but
> >from what I've seen of the larger corporates and their attitude towards
> >PM'ing it strikes me that 90% of PMs don't actually have a fucking clue
> >a) how to get the best from people and b) how to actually *deliver*;
> >it's all based around ticks in boxes so someone else gets the blame when
> >it goes wrong, rather than trying to work /with/ people to make sure it
> >doesn't go shit-shaped in the first place.
>
> I think you've described the difference between managing people and
> managing projects.
Managing *successful* projects /is/ managing people, IMHO, but I'm happy
to admit I'm swimming against the tide on that one.
> Good people managers are incredibly rare, and it
> seems to be impossible to teach/learn how to do it. I'm doing it
> myself now, and finding it way harder than the semi-tech stuff I've
> done for the last 25 years.
I seem to be able to do it without any major effort. For me the semi-
tech planning stuff is harder, but then we all have strengths and
weaknesses.
> We have a lot of people, especially developers, who work from home 1
> or 2 days a week here. Which is great, normally. But we've got a big
> deadline on Friday this week, and hitting it will require everybody
> talking to everybody else, all the time, so I've just sent an email
> telling the two developers they have to be in the rest of this week.
> It took me ages to word it, and I still feel like a shit. But I guess
> my job is not to be their mate.
It's not an unreasonable request. The key IME is not to try and dress it
up as anything other than what it is; a difficult situation that
requires everyone to pull together, including people making sacrifices.
I think where a lot of poor man-managers go wrong is a) expecting to be
everyone's friend and b) trying to phrase issues as if they're not
issues.
But I'm jobless, so WTF would I know.
--
Bear
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Net providers [message #786994 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 15:10 |
|
On 17 Jul 2006 12:59:38 GMT, "dwb" <parc_erom_tey [at] crossdata.co.uk>
wrote:
>Champ wrote:
>
>> We have a lot of people, especially developers, who work from home 1
>> or 2 days a week here. Which is great, normally. But we've got a big
>> deadline on Friday this week, and hitting it will require everybody
>> talking to everybody else, all the time, so I've just sent an email
>> telling the two developers they have to be in the rest of this week.
>> It took me ages to word it, and I still feel like a shit. But I guess
>> my job is not to be their mate.
>
>How much notice did you give them? Only a few days? Seems a bit tough -
>especially if they normally do things on those days (for instance,
>currently when I WFH it usually coincides with a physio appointment...)
I gave them no notice. Everyone knows we've got a big deadline on
Friday, and I was pretty pissed off to get into work today and find
both developers on my team working from home, without having told me.
I was even more pissed off by 11am when half a dozen phone calls and
20+ emails had been flying around to deal with stuff that should be
done face to face. These guys should have known they'd be wanted in
the office this week, to be honest - they're not code-monkeys, their
high quality (and highly paid) professionals.
--
Champ
ZX10R
GPz750turbo
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Thu Jan 8 00:46:33 CET 2009
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.15910 Sekunden |
