first, we all know there's a reasnonable correlation between epa estimates and our observed results. It's quite good.
I've always thought so. You have some manner of baseline, and you go from there.
And the concept of some sort of magick number of miles per gallon is silly anyhow. Is it for me, who tends to drive like a granny, and who gets very near the EPA figure, or is it for the person with a lead foot that leaves their vehicle idle when they go places, never shutting it off.
My old Jeep Grand Cherokee, got around 5 miles per gallon better gas mileage when I drove it than when my wife did. She's much more agressive a driver than I am, and drives faster overall.
My new Jeep and her present Jeep are almost identical, but once again, I get better gas mileage in mine.
So when you have people complaining that they don't get anywhere near the sticker MPG, its usually a good clue that they aren't driving in an economical fashion
And then for the folks that think the ratings are bad, who is right? Am I wrong because I get very much the mileage the sticker say, and my better half is right, because she doesn't?
What do you mean "obviously" you can't, how technologically incompetent are you?
Don't be a dumbass. I'm not going to send some AC files - this is slashdot. So how the sweet baby jezzus am I goung to tell you anything? You have a MAC and a PC both with MS Office and AO or another version? A large format printer, and data projector and files from random other people with different versions of MS Office on them?
I already pointed out specific problems MS Offoce has in another post. Believe or do not believe, a fuck is not given, dear coward.
You see, this is an issue that a lot of shillboys have. I used every aspect of MS Office on a daily basis, up until 2012. I suspect that many of you use one or two functions. That's why I also had a copy of OO on hand, so I could open the doc files that MS Office couldn't. Once again, believe or do not, Do not care.
I had assumed the cross-incompatibility issues had mostly gone away in the late 90s / early 2000s - is that a bad assumption?
The last time I had used Microsoft Office was in 2012, and it still had those issues then.
Personally I was happy to escape to libre-office just because it (a) worked well and (b) let me escape the damn ribbon interface! (yes yes I know it is just a pictorial equivalent of a menu for most purposes, I just happen to find a list of words easier to parse a textual index than a random jumble of icons spewed across the screen.
I had to use at times both the menu style and ribbon interfaces. I got reasonably proficient in the Ribbon, and it was simply slower, and for all the reasons you gave.
I have, because Microsoft's office isn't compatible with itself from Mac to PC
Of course it is, I have done it many times. Show me a file that is compatible with one and not the other.
Obviously I can't show you a specific file, but PowerPoint was not good at going across platform. When we had PowerPoints that were originally on a PC, but being shown on a Mac, we had to run and re-run them to get rid of the bugs. We had problems with images, as some of the incoming images in either docs or PP would be CMYK jpegs, ( I have no idea why some did that) but the Mac Version of Office would only show RGB jpegs. And it was an office problem, because you could open the individual files in Photoshop or Preview, and they'd work.
Page formatting was all messed up as well - often while using the exact same font, it would show up differently, splitting pages
We also had a lot of issues with documents in general, from fonts to tabs and borders.
Seriously? Have you used star/open/libreoffice any time since 1998 and compared it with things like the graphing and various arbitrary limits in MS Excel for example?
I suspect that lucm might be like the guy that complains about how there aren't any drivers for Linux, which is another 1998 problem. It happens in here, just like the people who complain about the Mac single button mouse, of which I haven't used one since around 1998.
As always, when we get into complaining about problems from 15-20 years ago, I ask why Windows 1.0 sucked so badly.
And so many of these arguments are made from a monoculture persepctive. If you only work on Windows, if your production is never going to be accessed again, Microsoft Office might be a decent tool for you. But it isn't a monoculture world any more
We're not talking about nuclear reactor plans here. This is just documents, we don't need pixel perfect.
Ahh, there we go. You have made yourself quite clear Your bar is set around 2 or so.
Yes if you open a MS-Word 97 document in BrokenOffice or LibreOffice it may get a little off here and there, but for the most part it will work.
I made a mistake, You are so beholden to Microsoft that you accept failure You have no bar.
The problem is that those alternatives suck compared to the original.
I have old microsoft doc files that won't even open up in newer versions, yet show up pretty as you please in OO or AO. What the hell kind of Bizzarro world do you live in where the application that doesn't work is superior, and the application that saves yer sorry backside does, but that makes it suck?
Microsoft fails at creating high quality applications in general, but somehow for Word, Excel and PowerPoint they've hit the sweet spot.
If you define "sweet Spot" as working only on the same version, everyone using the same version, that you do not need historical documents, and you only work on one platform, it is adequate.
And that's really great work if you can get it. Some of us however, have historical documents to access, we have documents across a large number of versions and different originating softwares. Microsoft office is a complete non-starter there.
Anyone who says LibreOffice is a total piece of shit is wrong,
Yet you wrote:
The problem is that those alternatives suck compared to the original.
Way to be consistent Sparky! Which one is it?
but anyone who claims it offers a better user experience than Microsoft Office is a zealot or an idiot.
Or needs cross platform compatibility. Or needs to open many versions of documents, from different sources and software.
I don't mean to be cruel, but seriously my good man, You need to get this through yer brain pan, cuz sumpin ain't clickin'. Some of us need Office applications that do not restrict themselves to one platform and one platform only. There are office Applications that reproduce flawlessly across Windows, OSX, and Linux platforms, and Microsoft office simply does not do that, so it is a total failure at that, no matter what you might think.
Maybe those dozens of "satisfied" people lie to you because you're clearly not in touch wih reality and now that you've dragged them down in your pit of bad software you're on radio silence for them. And while you're here, talking about inferior products, oblivious that the seed of discontent and misery shoveled down the throat of people is bound to grow into crops of hate, they're planning their revenge.
Hell, you talk purdier than I do!
So Sparky, what's your solution to the need for cross platform compatibility in office functions?
I have not seen one person who happily switched from office to libre.
I have, because Microsoft's office isn't compatible with itself from Mac to PC, And not at all on Linux. Also problems with different versions.
Now that I am on the open Offices, every file works perfectly on all three platforms, even a freakin' Raspberry Pi for crissakes. It will even open older MS Office formats.
Maybe if you only ever have to do simple shit on identical Microsoft computers, you can use an inferior product like Microsoft's. I have work to do across platforms, and it simply is not capable of it. Out of a hundred, it doesn't even get out of the gates at 0.
And I have many dozens of people I've switched who are very happy with Libre.
In the late 1990s Microsoft was found guilty of violations of the anti-trust laws for using their monopoly in one market (operating systems) to leverage market share in another market (browsers).
And nowadays one of the most popular platforms, iOS, not only ships with a web browser that you can't uninstall (apparently and anti-competitive move) but does not even allow the installation of other web browsers!.
That isn't anti-competitive because Apple made the product specifically for its browser. If there were 20 different manufacturers making iPhones, it would be a different matter.
Either you trolling or you are a moron, your view has been already proven wrong
I was doing a oft repeated, but entirely wrong concept, and it was meant to be humorous. Yes, there are people who still believe such tripe.
I'm not a member of the 1 percent, but am well off enough to know that every time I get some extra money, either via tax cut or in recent years through estate, that I bank or invest it.
Which is exactly what the 1 percent does.
Eliminating the minumum wage depends on the outrageous notion that the path to prosperity is acheived by making as many people as poor as possible.
And deregulation results in all businesses working for the betterment of mankind, is ridiculous. If you increase profit byallowing the Cuyahoga river to catch fire, you don't clean it up until you are forced to.
"How in the hell will job creators create jobs if the money they need to create the jobs is in the hands of the people they are creating the jobs for?"
What about robots and computers?
Owning them reduce your job creator parameter to your prosperity function.
It's why USA is not rich anymore like it was in 1970.
Get real, we have been robbed by technology.
To some extent, yes. But our fixes for the changing technology have not worked. We tried the service economy, which we are reaping the results of now - which is not good. The underlying premise of the Service economy was two people in a closet, selling their hats to each other, and both making money and being a boss.
We tried during the first years of this century, the concept of certain items like real estate, increasing in value up to and including infinity. Coupled with the always in debt mode, we tried maxing out many lines of credit. The collapse was happening and the whackadoodle economic model we were using for the first 6 years of this century only masked it for a little while. Then the dam burst. People who are pissed at the economy now are perhaps not looking at the fact that a miracle occurred, because by all tights, we should have entered a decade plus depression that would make the 1930's look like a party.
The model is broken. We will need to either come up with manufacturing and other ways for large groups of people to be employed gainfully, or start the first steps of the economy where 90 percent of people never work at all, ever.
Speaking seriously, once you have a basic income, you can get rid of the minimum wage as well as some parts of labor law, making the economy a lot freer.
Sure, as well as cut through a lot of red tape as there will be less duplication of effort, less agencies involved.
This might be a winning combination for Republicans.
The Ads and clickbait are how they make money. Without them the aspects have no value. Yahoo giving us features without them making money is why the company is tanking.
Yeah, but the mode of presenting them isn't working. This is like a parent who beats their child for every infraction, and steps it up with more intense beating. Eventually the beatings become lethal. So if the ads become a bigger pain in the ass, and people block them, but then they make tham more intrusive, leading to more blocking, then it fails. That's a positive feedback loop.
No he is saying unless you have insane amounts of money and massive security teams then most likely MS, google, Amazon etc run far more secure servers than the average enterprise is ever capable of achieving.
Then perhaps he might not try to make perfect the enemy of good.
There are some aspects of Yahoo that are worthwhile. Their groups are easy to run and maintain, and they have a sports section that beats the pants off of Disneyfied ESPN. And it is simple to get rid of the email ads, by just forwarding the email to your normal email program.
The part that kills Yahoo is that they are around 50 percent clickbait, plus it seems they have an odd fixation on Kim Kardashian, the dumpster sex symbol. So I just link the sports, and stopped visiting the front page a good while back.
Slashdot Mirror
first, we all know there's a reasnonable correlation between epa estimates and our observed results. It's quite good.
I've always thought so. You have some manner of baseline, and you go from there.
And the concept of some sort of magick number of miles per gallon is silly anyhow. Is it for me, who tends to drive like a granny, and who gets very near the EPA figure, or is it for the person with a lead foot that leaves their vehicle idle when they go places, never shutting it off.
My old Jeep Grand Cherokee, got around 5 miles per gallon better gas mileage when I drove it than when my wife did. She's much more agressive a driver than I am, and drives faster overall.
My new Jeep and her present Jeep are almost identical, but once again, I get better gas mileage in mine.
So when you have people complaining that they don't get anywhere near the sticker MPG, its usually a good clue that they aren't driving in an economical fashion And then for the folks that think the ratings are bad, who is right? Am I wrong because I get very much the mileage the sticker say, and my better half is right, because she doesn't?
Hell, you talk purdier than I do!
This is correct, even when you're not dumbing down your language on purpose.
So Sparky, what's your solution to the need for cross platform compatibility in office functions?
Is calling me "Sparky" some kind of insult? That's so cute! Care to share where you're from? Somewhere in the third world I guess?
Dude, you spent another post calling me a liar, so your thin skin with me calling you "sparky" is noted.
Look my good man. You really should be on Youtube comments, because they are very fitting.
That, you may take as an insult. Good day sir. Reply if you like, I don't see the point in conversing with people that call me a liar.
Obviously I can't show you a specific file
What do you mean "obviously" you can't, how technologically incompetent are you?
Don't be a dumbass. I'm not going to send some AC files - this is slashdot. So how the sweet baby jezzus am I goung to tell you anything? You have a MAC and a PC both with MS Office and AO or another version? A large format printer, and data projector and files from random other people with different versions of MS Office on them?
I already pointed out specific problems MS Offoce has in another post. Believe or do not believe, a fuck is not given, dear coward.
You see, this is an issue that a lot of shillboys have. I used every aspect of MS Office on a daily basis, up until 2012. I suspect that many of you use one or two functions. That's why I also had a copy of OO on hand, so I could open the doc files that MS Office couldn't. Once again, believe or do not, Do not care.
I'm going to call bullshit on this...
I'm gonna call bullshit on your bullshit.
Take that atheists!
I had assumed the cross-incompatibility issues had mostly gone away in the late 90s / early 2000s - is that a bad assumption?
The last time I had used Microsoft Office was in 2012, and it still had those issues then.
Personally I was happy to escape to libre-office just because it (a) worked well and (b) let me escape the damn ribbon interface! (yes yes I know it is just a pictorial equivalent of a menu for most purposes, I just happen to find a list of words easier to parse a textual index than a random jumble of icons spewed across the screen.
I had to use at times both the menu style and ribbon interfaces. I got reasonably proficient in the Ribbon, and it was simply slower, and for all the reasons you gave.
He won't because he can't because he made it up.
Out of whole cloth no doubt. I just responded with some of the Windows to Mac MSO problems.
I have, because Microsoft's office isn't compatible with itself from Mac to PC
Of course it is, I have done it many times. Show me a file that is compatible with one and not the other.
Obviously I can't show you a specific file, but PowerPoint was not good at going across platform. When we had PowerPoints that were originally on a PC, but being shown on a Mac, we had to run and re-run them to get rid of the bugs. We had problems with images, as some of the incoming images in either docs or PP would be CMYK jpegs, ( I have no idea why some did that) but the Mac Version of Office would only show RGB jpegs. And it was an office problem, because you could open the individual files in Photoshop or Preview, and they'd work. Page formatting was all messed up as well - often while using the exact same font, it would show up differently, splitting pages
We also had a lot of issues with documents in general, from fonts to tabs and borders.
Seriously? Have you used star/open/libreoffice any time since 1998 and compared it with things like the graphing and various arbitrary limits in MS Excel for example?
I suspect that lucm might be like the guy that complains about how there aren't any drivers for Linux, which is another 1998 problem. It happens in here, just like the people who complain about the Mac single button mouse, of which I haven't used one since around 1998.
As always, when we get into complaining about problems from 15-20 years ago, I ask why Windows 1.0 sucked so badly.
And so many of these arguments are made from a monoculture persepctive. If you only work on Windows, if your production is never going to be accessed again, Microsoft Office might be a decent tool for you. But it isn't a monoculture world any more
We're not talking about nuclear reactor plans here. This is just documents, we don't need pixel perfect.
Ahh, there we go. You have made yourself quite clear Your bar is set around 2 or so.
Yes if you open a MS-Word 97 document in BrokenOffice or LibreOffice it may get a little off here and there, but for the most part it will work.
I made a mistake, You are so beholden to Microsoft that you accept failure You have no bar.
The problem is that those alternatives suck compared to the original.
I have old microsoft doc files that won't even open up in newer versions, yet show up pretty as you please in OO or AO. What the hell kind of Bizzarro world do you live in where the application that doesn't work is superior, and the application that saves yer sorry backside does, but that makes it suck?
Microsoft fails at creating high quality applications in general, but somehow for Word, Excel and PowerPoint they've hit the sweet spot.
If you define "sweet Spot" as working only on the same version, everyone using the same version, that you do not need historical documents, and you only work on one platform, it is adequate.
And that's really great work if you can get it. Some of us however, have historical documents to access, we have documents across a large number of versions and different originating softwares. Microsoft office is a complete non-starter there. Anyone who says LibreOffice is a total piece of shit is wrong,
Yet you wrote:
The problem is that those alternatives suck compared to the original.
Way to be consistent Sparky! Which one is it?
but anyone who claims it offers a better user experience than Microsoft Office is a zealot or an idiot.
Or needs cross platform compatibility. Or needs to open many versions of documents, from different sources and software.
I don't mean to be cruel, but seriously my good man, You need to get this through yer brain pan, cuz sumpin ain't clickin'. Some of us need Office applications that do not restrict themselves to one platform and one platform only. There are office Applications that reproduce flawlessly across Windows, OSX, and Linux platforms, and Microsoft office simply does not do that, so it is a total failure at that, no matter what you might think.
Maybe those dozens of "satisfied" people lie to you because you're clearly not in touch wih reality and now that you've dragged them down in your pit of bad software you're on radio silence for them. And while you're here, talking about inferior products, oblivious that the seed of discontent and misery shoveled down the throat of people is bound to grow into crops of hate, they're planning their revenge.
Hell, you talk purdier than I do! So Sparky, what's your solution to the need for cross platform compatibility in office functions?
I have not seen one person who happily switched from office to libre.
I have, because Microsoft's office isn't compatible with itself from Mac to PC, And not at all on Linux. Also problems with different versions.
Now that I am on the open Offices, every file works perfectly on all three platforms, even a freakin' Raspberry Pi for crissakes. It will even open older MS Office formats.
Maybe if you only ever have to do simple shit on identical Microsoft computers, you can use an inferior product like Microsoft's. I have work to do across platforms, and it simply is not capable of it. Out of a hundred, it doesn't even get out of the gates at 0.
And I have many dozens of people I've switched who are very happy with Libre.
In the late 1990s Microsoft was found guilty of violations of the anti-trust laws for using their monopoly in one market (operating systems) to leverage market share in another market (browsers).
And nowadays one of the most popular platforms, iOS, not only ships with a web browser that you can't uninstall (apparently and anti-competitive move) but does not even allow the installation of other web browsers! .
That isn't anti-competitive because Apple made the product specifically for its browser. If there were 20 different manufacturers making iPhones, it would be a different matter.
Have you actually tried changing the search provider in Edge?
Microsoft is using wome strange new definition of the word "easy" that I was previously unaware of.
Nothing about Edge works well. Its a steaming wet pile of asparagus pee.
Either you trolling or you are a moron, your view has been already proven wrong
I was doing a oft repeated, but entirely wrong concept, and it was meant to be humorous. Yes, there are people who still believe such tripe.
I'm not a member of the 1 percent, but am well off enough to know that every time I get some extra money, either via tax cut or in recent years through estate, that I bank or invest it.
Which is exactly what the 1 percent does.
Eliminating the minumum wage depends on the outrageous notion that the path to prosperity is acheived by making as many people as poor as possible.
And deregulation results in all businesses working for the betterment of mankind, is ridiculous. If you increase profit byallowing the Cuyahoga river to catch fire, you don't clean it up until you are forced to.
Now see - that wasn't funny, was it?
Ads are a great time to take a pee, get a new beer or soda, and chat with the SO.
That's what the "pause" button is for, and it comes with the bonus that you get to choose when you want to take a break from the show.
I've had the stream break a few times - the video stream, not the pee stream...
"How in the hell will job creators create jobs if the money they need to create the jobs is in the hands of the people they are creating the jobs for?"
What about robots and computers?
Owning them reduce your job creator parameter to your prosperity function.
It's why USA is not rich anymore like it was in 1970.
Get real, we have been robbed by technology.
To some extent, yes. But our fixes for the changing technology have not worked. We tried the service economy, which we are reaping the results of now - which is not good. The underlying premise of the Service economy was two people in a closet, selling their hats to each other, and both making money and being a boss.
We tried during the first years of this century, the concept of certain items like real estate, increasing in value up to and including infinity. Coupled with the always in debt mode, we tried maxing out many lines of credit. The collapse was happening and the whackadoodle economic model we were using for the first 6 years of this century only masked it for a little while. Then the dam burst. People who are pissed at the economy now are perhaps not looking at the fact that a miracle occurred, because by all tights, we should have entered a decade plus depression that would make the 1930's look like a party.
The model is broken. We will need to either come up with manufacturing and other ways for large groups of people to be employed gainfully, or start the first steps of the economy where 90 percent of people never work at all, ever.
Without ads isn't important to most people? I'll need a citation.
Ads are a great time to take a pee, get a new beer or soda, and chat with the SO.
So is the pause button.
So are ads.
Ads are a great time to take a pee, get a new beer or soda, and chat with the SO.
This may come as a surprise, but streamed video can be paused! This has been an option for quite a while, and can be invoked at any time.
Not that I'm a Netflux customer, but I've had a number of times that pausing has broken the stream.
Speaking seriously, once you have a basic income, you can get rid of the minimum wage as well as some parts of labor law, making the economy a lot freer.
Sure, as well as cut through a lot of red tape as there will be less duplication of effort, less agencies involved.
This might be a winning combination for Republicans.
I thought you said you were speaking seriously.
Not sure this makes a difference when one can just hit the pause button
But it does.
The Ads and clickbait are how they make money. Without them the aspects have no value. Yahoo giving us features without them making money is why the company is tanking.
Yeah, but the mode of presenting them isn't working. This is like a parent who beats their child for every infraction, and steps it up with more intense beating. Eventually the beatings become lethal. So if the ads become a bigger pain in the ass, and people block them, but then they make tham more intrusive, leading to more blocking, then it fails. That's a positive feedback loop.
No he is saying unless you have insane amounts of money and massive security teams then most likely MS, google, Amazon etc run far more secure servers than the average enterprise is ever capable of achieving.
Then perhaps he might not try to make perfect the enemy of good.
Without ads isn't important to most people? I'll need a citation.
Ads are a great time to take a pee, get a new beer or soda, and chat with the SO.
The real reason for people leaving Netflix is the blocking of VPNs and proxies and the dull nature of Netflix original content.
And since it appears that most all movies today are remakes, and often not that good, why buy into that?
The part that kills Yahoo is that they are around 50 percent clickbait, plus it seems they have an odd fixation on Kim Kardashian, the dumpster sex symbol. So I just link the sports, and stopped visiting the front page a good while back.