Some weird rendering going on in OO.o for what reason I do not know.
This I agree with, and add larger and complex.doc files. If you share a dozen of 500-page.doc files (with embedded graphs etc) with your customer, you simply don't put your trust in the OO.o import thingy.
OTOH, it must be said that the OO.o writer is a tool that is far more intelligent than office 2000/2003 word; unfortunately this can't be said about the other components of OO.o.
We "converted" a company of similar size to OO.o 2.x and ended up with still having about 15 ms-office installations for the abovementioned reasons. The internal agenda runs on OO.o, whilst the people who work with customers must have two office suites on their desktop.
The big psychological problem of this setup is that until properly trained^H^H^Hlarted, the dual-stacked users will not acknowledge the situation and simply use MSO for all of their work.
Thus, converting to OO.o is a double edged sword. It depends very strongly on what kind of agenda, employees and customers you have.
I have been this 'bold' for many years now. I configure zero swap on almost all modern computers that have >=2GB ram, knowing that there is no real reason for it. (Even in microsoft os despite countless 'are you REALLY sure?!?!' thingies.) And heck, one day I even stared at a photoshop message saying something about 'no swap found - are you nuts' - i mean, why should a userspace application care about swap? (I can understand that in truecrypt but photoshop?)
Anyway, my reasoning behing why swap is useless (in Linux): 1. I have enough RAM for everything these days. 2. In the rare ocassion I need more memory I can always dd/dev/zero into as many swap file(s) as i desire and swapon, and dispose of them when I'm done. 3. If I needed more RAM routinely, I'd buy it (and perhaps sacrifice one lunch:). 4. Swapping out those mingettys for 100K of extra disk buffers is nice, but neglectable. 5. When an application goes on a memory rampage, it gets OOMed without my hard drive going nuts first.
Moreover, having no swap allows me to create diskless computers with everything on NFS. Also, I'm not sure how healthy it is to put swap on a SSD/flash (i know, vista boost, but we'll talk in 3 years when flash drives get massively boosted out of service).
Finally, swap is really useful for one thing: hibernation. And that is only because it happens to be used as hibernation space. However, with tuxonice, you can as well use a separate file.
Yes. The i386 (whose memory model is still used today in all 'ia32' processors) can address 16 terabytes or so (don't know the exact figure) of _virtual_ memory. So while individual processes are limited by the 4gb (32-bit) barrier, there can be many such processes each with its own 4gb address space. You would then swap individual pages between HDD and system RAM as needed. In P6, PAE was added, so that you could 'swap' into high memory (system RAM addresses from 4gb to 64gb).
Also, if the PC/notebook/whatever has some special features - e.g. buttons - the preinstalled Linux will have them mapped to sensible functions. It's the polishing.
You split your admin-only program to an admin-service and unprivileged client. Bravo guys. You just reinvented the wheel.
Now you want to work on preventing *anyone* from calling your admin service and messing with whatever it can do. And no, don't invent custom noone-can-figure-it-out protocols, it does not work that way.
Slashdot Mirror
So why is the window called "Windows 2000 SP4 Pro"?
This I agree with, and add larger and complex .doc files. If you share a dozen of 500-page .doc files (with embedded graphs etc) with your customer, you simply don't put your trust in the OO.o import thingy.
OTOH, it must be said that the OO.o writer is a tool that is far more intelligent than office 2000/2003 word; unfortunately this can't be said about the other components of OO.o.
We "converted" a company of similar size to OO.o 2.x and ended up with still having about 15 ms-office installations for the abovementioned reasons. The internal agenda runs on OO.o, whilst the people who work with customers must have two office suites on their desktop.
The big psychological problem of this setup is that until properly trained^H^H^Hlarted, the dual-stacked users will not acknowledge the situation and simply use MSO for all of their work.
Thus, converting to OO.o is a double edged sword. It depends very strongly on what kind of agenda, employees and customers you have.
Yes. For example, music playing.
No, they will get my $50 and I will get a playable game w/o any rootkits. That's a good deal.
Yes, that is exactly it.
I am going to avoid SecuROM by downloading the game from the pirate bay. Even though I'll buy the game.
I have been this 'bold' for many years now. I configure zero swap on almost all modern computers that have >=2GB ram, knowing that there is no real reason for it. (Even in microsoft os despite countless 'are you REALLY sure?!?!' thingies.) And heck, one day I even stared at a photoshop message saying something about 'no swap found - are you nuts' - i mean, why should a userspace application care about swap? (I can understand that in truecrypt but photoshop?)
Anyway, my reasoning behing why swap is useless (in Linux): /dev/zero into as many swap file(s) as i desire and swapon, and dispose of them when I'm done. :).
1. I have enough RAM for everything these days.
2. In the rare ocassion I need more memory I can always dd
3. If I needed more RAM routinely, I'd buy it (and perhaps sacrifice one lunch
4. Swapping out those mingettys for 100K of extra disk buffers is nice, but neglectable.
5. When an application goes on a memory rampage, it gets OOMed without my hard drive going nuts first.
Moreover, having no swap allows me to create diskless computers with everything on NFS. Also, I'm not sure how healthy it is to put swap on a SSD/flash (i know, vista boost, but we'll talk in 3 years when flash drives get massively boosted out of service).
Finally, swap is really useful for one thing: hibernation. And that is only because it happens to be used as hibernation space. However, with tuxonice, you can as well use a separate file.
Yes. The i386 (whose memory model is still used today in all 'ia32' processors) can address 16 terabytes or so (don't know the exact figure) of _virtual_ memory. So while individual processes are limited by the 4gb (32-bit) barrier, there can be many such processes each with its own 4gb address space. You would then swap individual pages between HDD and system RAM as needed. In P6, PAE was added, so that you could 'swap' into high memory (system RAM addresses from 4gb to 64gb).
Yeah, I mixed it up.
so far no word when we'll be able to get this mini distro. guess they want to synch the release with 2008.1 in october?
Activate Omega 13!
Communism with its central planning sounds more like 'cathedral' than 'bazaar' to me.
So where do you call to request an extension for windows xp? Who you gonna call?
I agree. In addition, I find the taskbar most useless as well.
Was Mulder also there?
At a geometric rate?
Also, if the PC/notebook/whatever has some special features - e.g. buttons - the preinstalled Linux will have them mapped to sensible functions. It's the polishing.
Blite my shiny, metal ass.
Exactly my words. And on top of it: getting laid is mostly harmless and yet was removed from the game (GTASA, that is).
You split your admin-only program to an admin-service and unprivileged client. Bravo guys. You just reinvented the wheel.
Now you want to work on preventing *anyone* from calling your admin service and messing with whatever it can do. And no, don't invent custom noone-can-figure-it-out protocols, it does not work that way.