I develop on an average machine (a 2014 MBP, i5 with 8GB RAM). I don't need any more grunt because I have AWS at my fingertips. I can have a cluster of massively powered machines at a very reasonable price - you only pay for them while you use them.

If, however, I was a gamer, where latency is a key issue, I'd want that power a bit closer. But, I'd need to spend more money even if I only played three hours a week.

Pros and cons with both approaches.


There's no question here. But I'll guess you want to know if a Citrix system could match your current run of the mill i7 based PC. In your test, no it didn't fare well but we don't know what the Citrix server is on. Until we know what powers the server it's easy to see for your use it's slower.

Your management should have no problem with you continuing to use your system and using the cloud system when its needed.

Citrix at first was not called cloud computing so that came later. It was more of a labeling effort rather than what I call cloud computing. In my view cloud computing can be a true cloud where your compute job can be spread over many CPUs in the compute farm. For Citrix this farm is usually pretty small and is sized to meet the meager needs rather than something for a power user.

Your Citrix server is most likely suited for Word and email use from the sounds of it.


IT Friends,

Let me start by saying I am not an IT professional. Our company recently changed to a cloud based environment. We are seeing substantial efficiency loss in the calculation times of our templates (mostly excel based). It's typically only seconds per calculation, but adds up throughout the day. My current desktop has the following set up: Windows 10, Office 16, Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4790 CPU @3.60 GHz 16.0GB RAM 64-bit operating system. I am being told that no cloud environment can match the processing speed for excel calculations of my desktop. I find that very hard to believe. Is that true and I just don't understand because I'm not an IT professional? My thought on cloud development was that the point was to be able to match your home computing speed no matter where you were. It wouldn't make sense in my mind with IT advancements tha we are moving backward in processing speed. Our current cloud environment is running through Citrix. If there is any other information you'd need to know, please ask and I will find it out.


I guess the beauty of markdown is that they can introduce it without it really affecting people who don't know or care about it.

The only markdown directives that might get in the way are, as you said, asterisks. I guess FB chat doesn't allow hyperlinks, headings or lists?

Anything that pushes Markdown more mainstream is good though. I started a business recently that's hopefully going to introduce non-tech people to Markdown, so the more exposure the better.


I just noticed yesterday that FB Messenger ate my asterisks. Today, I just noticed that it was actually parsing my asterisks into bold! And it parses Markdown's syntax for italics too! I swear this is new. Try sending someone a message with Facebook and you can do: *bold* or _italics_ ... Yes, it's not exactly Markdown b/c Markdown requires two asterisks for bold, or else it functions as a synonym for italics with one asterisk. But still ...


As a developer of apps for embedded devices, testers on the production line and field diagnostics I've run afoul of IT groups that were for the most part not willing to invest the time to embrace the product development side of the business.

IT seems OK for run of the mill office work, the company web site, billing systems and such but the product developers are aliens or "the enemy within."

So they don't support us. That's fine by us. They also don't want the job but are ready to throw stumbling blocks in your path.

Is IT outdated today for companies that create apps and more?


Shadow IT is the usage of unauthorized tech by employees; usually cloud applications and services.

A progression of the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) debate, I have not said that the applications or services themselves are inherently insecure. Nor that usage is for malicious purposes. Quite the opposite is mostly true.

Insecurity and risk enter the equation because by being unauthorized shadow IT remains invisible to security controls. This can lead to the creation of an unmanaged attack surface, and blind spots in your company security implementation are never going to be a good thing.

Or are they?

There are upsides to shadow IT usage for just about any organisation, in that it can 'shine a light' on applications and services that can aid productivity and might otherwise not be considered by the business.

Equally, they can shine that light on a policy restriction that gets in the way of user productivity, and so the savvy employee finds a way to work around it. And adding something to that corporate policy that prohibits such usage isn't, when you think about it, likely to be effective.

If you want to truly embrace digital transformation and all the business benefits that can bring, then bringing shadow IT into the fold is part and parcel of it. Getting the balance between convenience and control is key, and true visibility the goal.

As I said to begin with, it's not the apps or services themselves that is the problem; it's them not being visible ...


I need to store videos and pictures somewhere. I host my sites on shared hosting because they don't require much power and shared hosting can handle them just fine (for now).

I'm planning to create something new that requires video and picture uploading. So I need storage space to upload files, I'll lose bandwidth for displaying images/videos.

I was looking at S3 and Google Cloud but they have few billing options. Can someone who is more experienced tell me which should I use and how those cloud storages work. Do they bill bandwidth and storage, what about displaying videos and so on? I also saw they bill some requests, PUT, GET...