Re: The Intel you know (Jan. 13)

Good enough processing — you hit the nail!

Another usage for the term would be “”Why do I need the anything faster than a P4?”” Seriously

in the small business world, which in Canada account for 40 per cent of all IT spending (IDC Canadian SMB Multi-Client Study), a P4 chip suffices for anything from servers to engineering workstations. Our company doesn’t crunch enough data to need anything bigger. I haven’t heard anyone in our small company (65 users) complain in the last two years that their computer or the server was too slow! We just don’t need any more power than we already have with current technology. We will be purchasing new hardware this year but it will all be at the low end. I’m more interested these days in chips that are smaller, include components that used to be ancillary chips, or consume less power. These features make for computers that I can use in novel applications.

Scott White

Re: Who are we forgetting? (Jan. 12)

My name is Stephanie Rose. I am a Political Science student at Acadia University. Being an Inuk person, and being from Nunavut, I have a concern I would like to express.

Inuit are not First Nations. I am clarifying this because people must begin to understand the difference. If you must use a term to refer to the Inuit, then you must call them “”Aboriginal Peoples.”” This is an appropriate and accurate term. “”First Nations Peoples”” refers to those who belong to various Indian groups across Canada, of which Inuit is not one.

As Inuit are Aboriginal Peoples, as opposed to First Nations, we are not subject to the same rights as a First Nations person would be. They have certain rights granted to them through the Indian Act. Inuit have no rights through the Indian Act. First Nations Peoples, if living on reserves, do not have to pay income taxes. This is one factor which distinguishes the two groups, along with many others. If you are curious about other differences, there are Inuit organizations that would love to help you, such as Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, and many more.

This is a classic mistake, many have made it. But I believe that by clarifying and explaining to others the difference, we can then properly educate and inform others.

I do hope that by reading this, you understand now the difference and will not continue to call Inuit people First Nations. They are two very different cultures, languages, lifestyles, and people. And as such, both groups would appreciate being acknowledged correctly.

Stephanie Rose

Inuk = singular term
Inuit = plural term, the term “”Inuits”” does not exist
Eskimo = a term for Inuit people which is not used anymore, as it is not appropriate

Re: The opportunity cost of offshore (Jan. 9)

Once again, the debate on the merits of offshore outsourcing ignores the emotional impact of task/industry ownership on the Canadian IT work force. This is demotivating to any industry, not least IT. The fact that we are already talking about moving on — Are kids to be encouraged to follow a career in computer science? — is to my mind appallingly shallow!

Efficient and cheaper business practice is understandable, but in the IT world makes no sense long term. I agree wholeheartedly that the loss of consulting savvy is dangerous. Can anyone think this is advantageous? The least research will show how a country like India has already shanghaied the IT industry – We are only now waking up to the fact that Indian entrepreneurs are starting to call the shots! Will we be able to retrieve the reins?

I am in favour of global interconnectivity and a strong believer in world solutions, but eroding the Canadian workforce, whittling away industry excellence/morale and creating an economic vacuum in the pursuit of a short term buck is naive and irresponsible to say the least.

When will we learn not to confuse capitalism with greed?

Rodger Harding

Re: The opportunity cost of offshore (Jan. 9)

North American execs better wakeup, as the old saying goes they are cutting off their nose in spite of their face. As they drive jobs out of the country and the standard of living continues to erode, who is going to buy their products? Oh I forgot every mud hut requires a 50-inch plasma TV.

On the serious side, there is always the threat of terrorism. It is not hard to imagine a programmer being bribed to include logic bombs or virus coding into projects from North America, or anywhere else in the world for that matter.

Globalization of the economy is a smoke screen. The true definition should be produce here sell everywhere. Not produce everywhere else and sell here.

John Curtis

Re: The opportunity cost of offshore (Jan. 9)

There are certain jobs (or a portion of certain jobs) we should want to keep in Canada to ensure we can stay competitive. Coding may seem low-level, but it quickly ties into business and technical analysis, design, system architecture and so on. Unlike buggy whips, coding is a foundation for more critical roles.

As for Kevin Yan saying, “”We’re culturally indoctrinated (in North America) to want to advance and move ahead to bigger projects. In India, it’s different. They like doing the same thing. They appreciate the stability of the job.”” — obviously he’s never worked with the Indians he talks about. I’m currently based in India, and the developers here want to be module leaders after a year and project managers a year after that. They’re MORE ambitious than most of the developers I work with in Canada.

Bryan Mallinson
Software developer/business analyst
Infosys Technologies Ltd.
Pune, India

Letters to the editor must include the writer’s name and company name along with an e-mail address or other contact information. All letters become the property of Editors reserve the right to edit submissions for length and content.

Share on LinkedIn Share with Google+