But you don't understand the spreadsheet until you see what all the formulas in all the cells are. We're not talking keeping track of finances, but let's say it's a battery life calculator spread scross three tabs, and those formulas don't come with comments. It's terribly difficult to figure out compared to a simple python or perl script that does the same thing.
Outlook has some esoteric features beyond just email and calender, and that is what gets a lot of companies locked into it. These are the check-off features that make customers use it over the competition even if they never use such features. Like sending forms for the recipient to fill out, attaching ActiveX infections, information rights management, etc.
Then Outlook needs Exchange Server and once you have Exchange Server you really can only proplery use Outlook with it. At this point you're locked in. You can't go to gmail because you don't have local control anymore and you lose security, you can't even set up a standard IMAP server because none of your IT guys knows shit about computers except what they learned in a Microsoft Certification course. You're stuck.
Agreed, MS is not compatible with MS. I once had a problem with an Office document that customers couldn't read properly in the mid 90s. Previously Office documents attempted to be backwards compatible, or you'd have an option to save the doc using an older format. But for this problem I get some help from Microsoft and their solution was to tell the customer to upgrade Office. There wasn't even a "reader" plugin for the older Office to support the newer format.
To be fair, I don't think Microsoft breaks compatibility because they're trying to force upgrades. I honestly think they break compatibility because they don't know how to implement software that can be backwards and forwards compatible, and they're in a mindset that they don't even see this as a failure. In other words, they're not evil they're just stupid. Most companies have to deal with customer demands and requirements. Microsoft has never had to do that and are instead in the mindset of telling customers what to do instead of vice versa.
Excel often fails because you won't know which numbers can be changed without seeing if there's a formula behind them, and you can't tell what the spreadsheet really does until you understand all the formulas. And trying to figure out the formulas is painful if you're not the author.
Well, you can always end up being acquired by a company that has swallowed the Microsoft Kool-aid. Then suddenly the corporate standard becomes a clumsy Word document, specifications will be made in Excel, and you'll be scratching your head trying to figure out how to navigate in Sharepoint or VSTS (now called Azure DevOps just to be extra insulting). IT and HR will be encouraging you to Yammer and use Team. In general you'll be using software that's adequate, it's certainly not great and it's not terrible but you'll be wishing for something better.
Keeping the version of Office you have is a good idea. There was NEVER a good reason to upgrade yearly anyway, that's just dumb and had nothing to do with security but mostly an autonomic action by IT department heads who are brainwashed by Redmond.
The cloud version, just avoid it. It does not work very well, especially if you need to do stuff like Project or Visio or want drawings in Word documents that actually look good. If you do go to Office 365, be prepared to have unexpected outages that you cannot control no matter how many grunts you get to fix it. Be prepared for data leaks, because now a third party with a poor reputation with security is your new gatekeeper. Make your own backups of important files, since you won't have any assurances that the third party is doing this for you.
Sure, it's fine if you're a startup, since the chances of your company surviving a few years is slim. But if you're answerable to your shareholders then use a proven solution and don't experiment in the cloud.
Go into a bar and watch two drunks debating a topic. Those guys make much better arguments for their side than you will see in politics. Stupidity is inherent in politics based upon an overwhelming amount of evidence.
Americans are the same way now. Politics is about name calling these days, pure and simple. No politician is presenting any ideas on what is a good way to govern, instead they only speak in order to bash the opposing but highly similar party.
DDG works great for me. No more creepy search results based upon what I last watched on Youtube. You may think such things are relevant, but I don't want them. I do not want tracking, I do not want searches tailored for me.
I went with Avast when I had a rootkit that the expensive anti-malware system I had failed to find it. Avast found it quickly and it left my computer much more responsive than the big-name variant. I haven't seen any real slowdown since.
I put it on my mother's computer because she's much more virus prone because she clicks on everything that promises to save her money or stop Hillary. And on her computer which is not as beefy it has a detectable slowdown, but the advantage is that it catches more things than the Windows defender appears to.
I haven't run definitive tests, but there are other places that do independent testing and Defender sticks somewhere in the middle. Ie, av-comparatives.org.
Man in the middle is not automatically bad, if you trust the man in the middle. If the third party called Microsoft did this then everyone would be happy, but because it's a different third party then it's bad. Even the kernel is a man in the middle here . How else do you scan the data between a browser and the internet without a man-in-the-middle? You could alter the browser, but assume that you can't.
Except that smartphones are crap at document viewing, finance mangement, tax prep, etc. A tablet is much better than a phone, just from the aspect of being able to view what's on the miniscule screen. But even a tablet is not as good as a PC. You will notice, I am sure, that tablets have not replaced PCs in the typical corporate office even though the vast majority of that work is merely viewing documents.
Not even dead, just not as good as they once were. People and enterprises are buying new PCs still, there is still money to be made. "Dead" in sales means don't bother trying to sell because there are so few buyers that it's not worth the effort, which is not true for PCs.
I have been programming for a few decades, I work on software, firmware, hardware, and deal with many parts of the company. I fully read the summary, and had no clue what it was about. Didn't even sound like technology, sounded more like marketing.
The agencies do not have legislative power, and yet presidents campaign as if they do because they make promises that technically can't be kept without either assistance or non-action by congress and the courts. None of these agencies would ever have existed without congressional action in the first place, and their mission is usually spelled out in law. Of course elections have become nothing more than popularity contests based upon good versus evil rhetoric rather than campaigns based on actually governing.
Unfortunately, over the last several decades congress has allowed the executive branch to acquire more power with less oversight. If congress and the president are from the same party, then congress is extremely reluctant to say no, but worse they also have a tendency to hand over extra powers under the mistaken idea that their party will never lose power.
Yes, technically congress has similar powers as the executive it's just that they don't use it much. Voters often don't care because they seem to often think that the president should be authoritarian, as it's the only office they bother to vote for.
Possibly only possible in NYC. Most other places require a car, even if only occasionally. Even farmers need cars because the walk to the store can take all day.
Slashdot Mirror
Being tracked should always be opt-in!
But you don't understand the spreadsheet until you see what all the formulas in all the cells are. We're not talking keeping track of finances, but let's say it's a battery life calculator spread scross three tabs, and those formulas don't come with comments. It's terribly difficult to figure out compared to a simple python or perl script that does the same thing.
Outlook has some esoteric features beyond just email and calender, and that is what gets a lot of companies locked into it. These are the check-off features that make customers use it over the competition even if they never use such features. Like sending forms for the recipient to fill out, attaching ActiveX infections, information rights management, etc.
Then Outlook needs Exchange Server and once you have Exchange Server you really can only proplery use Outlook with it. At this point you're locked in. You can't go to gmail because you don't have local control anymore and you lose security, you can't even set up a standard IMAP server because none of your IT guys knows shit about computers except what they learned in a Microsoft Certification course. You're stuck.
Agreed, MS is not compatible with MS. I once had a problem with an Office document that customers couldn't read properly in the mid 90s. Previously Office documents attempted to be backwards compatible, or you'd have an option to save the doc using an older format. But for this problem I get some help from Microsoft and their solution was to tell the customer to upgrade Office. There wasn't even a "reader" plugin for the older Office to support the newer format.
To be fair, I don't think Microsoft breaks compatibility because they're trying to force upgrades. I honestly think they break compatibility because they don't know how to implement software that can be backwards and forwards compatible, and they're in a mindset that they don't even see this as a failure. In other words, they're not evil they're just stupid. Most companies have to deal with customer demands and requirements. Microsoft has never had to do that and are instead in the mindset of telling customers what to do instead of vice versa.
Excel often fails because you won't know which numbers can be changed without seeing if there's a formula behind them, and you can't tell what the spreadsheet really does until you understand all the formulas. And trying to figure out the formulas is painful if you're not the author.
Well, you can always end up being acquired by a company that has swallowed the Microsoft Kool-aid. Then suddenly the corporate standard becomes a clumsy Word document, specifications will be made in Excel, and you'll be scratching your head trying to figure out how to navigate in Sharepoint or VSTS (now called Azure DevOps just to be extra insulting). IT and HR will be encouraging you to Yammer and use Team. In general you'll be using software that's adequate, it's certainly not great and it's not terrible but you'll be wishing for something better.
Keeping the version of Office you have is a good idea. There was NEVER a good reason to upgrade yearly anyway, that's just dumb and had nothing to do with security but mostly an autonomic action by IT department heads who are brainwashed by Redmond.
The cloud version, just avoid it. It does not work very well, especially if you need to do stuff like Project or Visio or want drawings in Word documents that actually look good. If you do go to Office 365, be prepared to have unexpected outages that you cannot control no matter how many grunts you get to fix it. Be prepared for data leaks, because now a third party with a poor reputation with security is your new gatekeeper. Make your own backups of important files, since you won't have any assurances that the third party is doing this for you.
Sure, it's fine if you're a startup, since the chances of your company surviving a few years is slim. But if you're answerable to your shareholders then use a proven solution and don't experiment in the cloud.
Go into a bar and watch two drunks debating a topic. Those guys make much better arguments for their side than you will see in politics. Stupidity is inherent in politics based upon an overwhelming amount of evidence.
Americans are the same way now. Politics is about name calling these days, pure and simple. No politician is presenting any ideas on what is a good way to govern, instead they only speak in order to bash the opposing but highly similar party.
DDG works great for me. No more creepy search results based upon what I last watched on Youtube. You may think such things are relevant, but I don't want them. I do not want tracking, I do not want searches tailored for me.
Except that the screens are so small that only those with 20/20 vision between the ages of 14 and 22 can read it without squinting.
Your honor, we find the defendant both guilty and not guilty.
I went with Avast when I had a rootkit that the expensive anti-malware system I had failed to find it. Avast found it quickly and it left my computer much more responsive than the big-name variant. I haven't seen any real slowdown since.
I put it on my mother's computer because she's much more virus prone because she clicks on everything that promises to save her money or stop Hillary. And on her computer which is not as beefy it has a detectable slowdown, but the advantage is that it catches more things than the Windows defender appears to.
I haven't run definitive tests, but there are other places that do independent testing and Defender sticks somewhere in the middle. Ie, av-comparatives.org.
Do browser plug-ins have this level of access?
Man in the middle is not automatically bad, if you trust the man in the middle. If the third party called Microsoft did this then everyone would be happy, but because it's a different third party then it's bad. Even the kernel is a man in the middle here . How else do you scan the data between a browser and the internet without a man-in-the-middle? You could alter the browser, but assume that you can't.
Except that smartphones are crap at document viewing, finance mangement, tax prep, etc. A tablet is much better than a phone, just from the aspect of being able to view what's on the miniscule screen. But even a tablet is not as good as a PC. You will notice, I am sure, that tablets have not replaced PCs in the typical corporate office even though the vast majority of that work is merely viewing documents.
Not even dead, just not as good as they once were. People and enterprises are buying new PCs still, there is still money to be made. "Dead" in sales means don't bother trying to sell because there are so few buyers that it's not worth the effort, which is not true for PCs.
death
You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.
I have been programming for a few decades, I work on software, firmware, hardware, and deal with many parts of the company. I fully read the summary, and had no clue what it was about. Didn't even sound like technology, sounded more like marketing.
The agencies do not have legislative power, and yet presidents campaign as if they do because they make promises that technically can't be kept without either assistance or non-action by congress and the courts. None of these agencies would ever have existed without congressional action in the first place, and their mission is usually spelled out in law. Of course elections have become nothing more than popularity contests based upon good versus evil rhetoric rather than campaigns based on actually governing.
Google analytics was the first permanent entry on my noscript. The entire concept is antithetical to consumer privacy.
After spending all my savings on a Tesla, that last thing I need is another $50/mo for a cellular account for my car...
Unfortunately, over the last several decades congress has allowed the executive branch to acquire more power with less oversight. If congress and the president are from the same party, then congress is extremely reluctant to say no, but worse they also have a tendency to hand over extra powers under the mistaken idea that their party will never lose power.
Yes, technically congress has similar powers as the executive it's just that they don't use it much. Voters often don't care because they seem to often think that the president should be authoritarian, as it's the only office they bother to vote for.
Possibly only possible in NYC. Most other places require a car, even if only occasionally. Even farmers need cars because the walk to the store can take all day.
I knew twenty somethings driving who were vastly more scary than any grandparents I had. People prone to rage are much more dangerous I think.