[HPCC-Conf] Conference Report

[Philippe J. Roussel]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------3175D54584222EEC28A9F37C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



Tony Duell wrote:
> =

> > > I'd rather have people coming who _want_ to come, talking about =

> > > what they want to talk about. That way you might at least get =

> > > some presentations with content...
> >
> > That's up to the conference organizing committee to decide.
> > Were you in it?
> =

> What's that got to do with it. Surely anyone should be able to express =
an
> opinion on how they think the conference could be improved.
True, just like any HP official with some vision should be open to
criticism on their products ... (see below). =

I just wanted to point out that one is more inclined to criticize somethi=
ng
when you've never done it yourself, due to lack of knowledge w.r.t. the d=
ay to day
problems you have to handle when you organize something on a voluntary ba=
sis.

> FWIW, I must have attended several hundred 'one-off' (i.e. not part of =
a
> course) lectures in my life so far. Many of the most interesting ones
> have been given by people I'd never heard of (and nor had anyone else..=
=2E)
> speaking on their own specialist subject. Many of the least interesting=

> ones were given by 'big names' who were asked to speak and who didn't
> really want to.
Also my experience...

> > The conference timetable was on the Internet a few days before.
> No it wasn't. A _provisional_ timetable -- the one that appeared in the=

> proceedings -- was on the internet. The point is, the actual timetable
> that the conference ran to was different. There were extra talks, leavi=
ng
> less time for one-to-one discussion.
A few extra talks were inserted indeed,
and I also think that the conference would have been better
if the organizing committee would have been more strict w.r.t.
the deadline for closing the timetable.
The decision to reduce it to a one day conference at a given moment,
and to change that later on again also caused a lot of confusion.
On hindsight, this was indeed a bad decision, but I doubt whether
I would not have made it given the limited amount of response at the
time it was made.

I guess that's one of the drawbacks of organizing a conference on a volun=
tary basis,
where commitments are made to a large extent on the basis of trust, =

and often very close to the deadline...
W.r.t. my own input for the conference, I plead guilty,
(Wlodek knows why).

> > > > Will you donate five HP49's to the next conference? =

> > > > Check with Wlodek on what was gained by HPCC.
> > Touch=E9!
> > > Oh, this is pathetic! The reason to keep in with HP is so that we g=
et
> > > free machines to give away as door prizes ?
> > No, but it is a nice side effect appreciated by most attendees.
> =

> FWIW, I know of at least one person who thought the whole idea of door
> prizes downgraded the conference to the level of a 'TV games show' (his=

> words, not mine), and therefore didn't attend. So some people feel even=

> more strongly about them than I do.
> =

> FWIW, I don't object to door prizes (even though my luck is such that I=

> never win anything like that), but I don't regard them as being an
> important part of the conference (or of the club generally). So if, in
> order to get them, we have to become dependant on HP then I would just
> drop the door prizes. Independance is much more important to me.
I don't refute that, but the question is whether you really are forced to=
 give up =

the so cherished "independence" as a club to get the chance to collect =

door prizes from "sponsors".
In my experience, these "conflicting" interests are never exposed =

in such a black-white manner. =

 =

> > (I did not win one of the door prices AFAIK ...),
> > and most are willing to live with the few extra considerations
> > necessary to keep a proper balance between freedom as a Users' Club
> > and dependence from HP.
> =

> I am still not convinced that anything is gained by becoming dependant =
on
> HP. I feel it is _very_ unlikely there will ever be internal informatio=
n
> (like those NOMAS documents) released to clubs again, for example.
> =

> > > IMHO the ability to discuss what we like is much more important tha=
n
> > > getting door prizes.
> > If HP imposed harsher conditions on the release of NOMAS information,=
 =

> > but have they?
> =

> Hang on... As I said, the HP42SV did not depend on _any_ documentation
> from HP (NOMAS or otherwise). The upgrade was discovered by taking apar=
t
> a real 42S and probing around. As I understand UK law, that is 100% leg=
al
> (there is at least one precedent for this), and that HP couldn't do
> anything to stop it.
> =

> But if the club was somehow controlled by HP, they could stop details o=
f
> the upgrade being printed in Datafile, they could stop it being discuss=
ed
> at a conference, and so on. Is that what you want?
For reasons already mentioned in this ongoing discussion,
I doubt whether HP would ever go that far.
 =

> If HP controlled the club, would they prevent 'negative' comments on HP=

> products from appearing in Datafile? Is that what you want?
Again, you are seeing it to much in a black-white perspective.
Criticism on a given product might be experienced as negative by some HP =
officials
in a given position, while others might see it as valuable feedback =

to improve on future products. As already argumented by Richard,
the media wherein and the time at which it is made public
also play an important role, and possible agreements with HP mostly conce=
rn
that aspect.
--------------3175D54584222EEC28A9F37C
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="Philippe.Roussel.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Philippe J. Roussel
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="Philippe.Roussel.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:Roussel;Philippe J.
tel;pager:1299
tel;cell:+32 (0)497 36 68 49
tel;fax:+32 (0)16 28 1844
tel;home:+32 (0)16 620909
tel;work:+32 (0)16 28 1299
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.imec.be
org:IMEC;STDI/TRY
adr:;;Kapeldreef 75;Heverlee;Flanders;3001;Belgium
version:2.1
email;internet:Philippe.Roussel@imec.be
title:Reliability Research Engineer
x-mozilla-cpt:;-30008
fn:Philippe J. Roussel
end:vcard

--------------3175D54584222EEC28A9F37C--