I gave a copy of openoffice to a coworker. She came back a few hours later saying it was crap because it doesn't do header and footer. She looked in the same place that MS Word has it, found it wasn't there, and concluded it wasn't added. She refused to use openoffice again.
People are stupid, annoying, ignorant and unwilling to learn.
In the short=term narrow-view, yes, it would be better if we developed for windows. In fact writing linux at all was a waste of time. And apache - we should have just made IIS modules.
However, we have to look at the larger picture.
As for your groupware problem - I suggest use a kolab server, and purchase the plugin for outlook express.
I'm a linux developer, and I don't get your point at all.
If you want to deal with a company, then deal with a company. Use Novell's SuSE for example, and get a support contract with them. The will insure that the apps they provide will be maintained for 5+ years (depending on your contract).
Who cares if the app is maintained by an 18 year old geek. How is this different from the proprietary world? If you want a level of guarantee, maintenance and support then get a support contract!
Heh, we (programmers) are often told (by our usability groups) that the direction we need to go in is to first do what is familiar to the user. And so we must copy MS first, then innovate second. I hate it as much as anyone, but that's what people are used to. If we innovate and make it different, people then complain about the high TCO from switching and relearning.
(I'm a KDE developer. And yes we have usability groups.)
The responses to this will be predicatable. Outrage, point-by-point counterpoints etc.
So instead, lets discuss why they published such a piece. What was their motivation here?
I've read the BCS magazine on many occasions, and often found it to be factually incorrect from over-simplification. This is a magazine that is aimed middle managers.
This particular article is a Member view. Is this just someones blog piece, or a regular column writer? Does this piece matter at all?
I had a look at the graphs, and read that FAQ. It seems that they aren't sure either way.
I do remember reading an article where they suggested that they might be able to divert (and to some extent, steer) a hurricane by putting down an oil slick. This would mess with the temperature differential (decrease it - act like a insulating layer iirc).
The graphs do not seem to convey enough information to be totally useful. What would be good would be to see a graph of: intensity*frequency against year. This would be more useful.
Also the graphs do seem to show it getting worse. But of course, too little data.
The FAQ basically says that there are so many variables involved, we don't really know.
We don't have a TV, and one day got a letter saying that they checked for a tv signal on 5 different occasions, and did not find a signal. The letter went on to say that they will not check again for another year (under harrassment laws, it said.)
Also if you have a tv, but don't watch tv, the best option is to get it modded so that it can't recieve tv signals. It's easy and cheap to do.
The favourite (iirc) theory currently is that initially intelligence was favoured for survival (more likely to a capture your prey etc).
Then women that prefered men who were intelligent survived longer, and so that was favoured.
Then it just came down to intelligence just being a sexual preference, with dimensing 'actual' returns on intelligence. The majority of our intelligence is from women's sexual preference rather than from any advantages of surving in the wild.
If MS judge up the cost of implementing it and the cost of not implementing it, and decide not to, then that's their decision. I fail to see the problem. They should have seen this comming a long time ago.
While this is true, the computers they can't deal with get sent out to private companies, who _are_ good. Either way they get the data - just the cheap or expensive way.
I can't believe this crap gets modded up all the time on slashdot. The Linux trademark is owned by the "LINUX MARK INSTITUTE", a non-profit organisation who protect it. They cannot sell it to MS or anyone else.
Hell, I'd be happy if I can get the work machines to use MSN without everyone in the office being admin. Sure it works for a normal user for a month until it decides it needs to upgrade, and _refuses_ to run unless you login as administrator and upgrade the stupid thing.
Hmm, I doubt it. I would expect that they did it because its enjoyable and they are driven to do it. I'm not sure if they fully understand they decision they make, and chose to have another child.
The long-long term view is a bit depressing, but I'll be loooooong dead by then. I don't think it's that silly to expect that we might have power to keep ourselves alive after a few billion years.
I can see your point that without a God, then what is the point in life? Why even bother living? I cannot give a satisfactory answer to that. But I think for most atheists the goal of improving humanity, and make humanity more powerful (control of environment, conquest of skies and space, etc) is a sufficient goal by itself.
You should watch the selinux talks (which is a framework for linux to do what you say).
I remember there being a few problems, such as most apps talk to X, so you have to let that through, and then X connects to everything else, so it's like you have a big hole in your sieve.
Also it gets more difficult when you have shared memory etc.
Slashdot Mirror
I gave a copy of openoffice to a coworker. She came back a few hours later saying it was crap because it doesn't do header and footer. She looked in the same place that MS Word has it, found it wasn't there, and concluded it wasn't added. She refused to use openoffice again.
People are stupid, annoying, ignorant and unwilling to learn.
Ah, I think I know understand your confusion.
Commercial != proprietary. Commercial software is software that is sold or produced by a company.
Proprietary software is closed source software, and that's what we mean by that "anyone who spends any money on [proprietary software] is a fool".
My answer was to go the Novell route, and get support _open source_ software. That way you get FOSS software, with a commercial backing.
In the short=term narrow-view, yes, it would be better if we developed for windows. In fact writing linux at all was a waste of time. And apache - we should have just made IIS modules.
However, we have to look at the larger picture.
As for your groupware problem - I suggest use a kolab server, and purchase the plugin for outlook express.
I'm a linux developer, and I don't get your point at all.
If you want to deal with a company, then deal with a company. Use Novell's SuSE for example, and get a support contract with them. The will insure that the apps they provide will be maintained for 5+ years (depending on your contract).
Who cares if the app is maintained by an 18 year old geek. How is this different from the proprietary world? If you want a level of guarantee, maintenance and support then get a support contract!
Heh, we (programmers) are often told (by our usability groups) that the direction we need to go in is to first do what is familiar to the user. And so we must copy MS first, then innovate second. I hate it as much as anyone, but that's what people are used to. If we innovate and make it different, people then complain about the high TCO from switching and relearning.
(I'm a KDE developer. And yes we have usability groups.)
The responses to this will be predicatable. Outrage, point-by-point counterpoints etc.
So instead, lets discuss why they published such a piece. What was their motivation here?
I've read the BCS magazine on many occasions, and often found it to be factually incorrect from over-simplification. This is a magazine that is aimed middle managers.
This particular article is a Member view. Is this just someones blog piece, or a regular column writer? Does this piece matter at all?
I had a look at the graphs, and read that FAQ. It seems that they aren't sure either way.
I do remember reading an article where they suggested that they might be able to divert (and to some extent, steer) a hurricane by putting down an oil slick. This would mess with the temperature differential (decrease it - act like a insulating layer iirc).
The graphs do not seem to convey enough information to be totally useful. What would be good would be to see a graph of: intensity*frequency against year. This would be more useful.
Also the graphs do seem to show it getting worse. But of course, too little data.
The FAQ basically says that there are so many variables involved, we don't really know.
It seems that it is not clear cut at all.
>Are you blaming Katrina on global warming?
a .warming.ap/
9 9102,00.html
Partly, yes.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/09/01/katrin
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,10
Um, it _has_ happened in the past. Many many times life has been almost completely wiped out. For example the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian_extinction wiped out 95+% of life.
We don't have a TV, and one day got a letter saying that they checked for a tv signal on 5 different occasions, and did not find a signal. The letter went on to say that they will not check again for another year (under harrassment laws, it said.)
Also if you have a tv, but don't watch tv, the best option is to get it modded so that it can't recieve tv signals. It's easy and cheap to do.
The favourite (iirc) theory currently is that initially intelligence was favoured for survival (more likely to a capture your prey etc).
Then women that prefered men who were intelligent survived longer, and so that was favoured.
Then it just came down to intelligence just being a sexual preference, with dimensing 'actual' returns on intelligence. The majority of our intelligence is from women's sexual preference rather than from any advantages of surving in the wild.
"Generally" says it all. If you meant UTF-16 then say UTF-16.
If MS judge up the cost of implementing it and the cost of not implementing it, and decide not to, then that's their decision. I fail to see the problem. They should have seen this comming a long time ago.
You've gotten Unicode and I think UTF-16 mixed up.
Read wikipedia so you understand it all.
While this is true, the computers they can't deal with get sent out to private companies, who _are_ good. Either way they get the data - just the cheap or expensive way.
Must have been very accurate - they calculated it to the exact dollar!
Not true, CSS has pagination rules.
I can't believe this crap gets modded up all the time on slashdot.
The Linux trademark is owned by the "LINUX MARK INSTITUTE", a non-profit organisation who protect it. They cannot sell it to MS or anyone else.
Hell, I'd be happy if I can get the work machines to use MSN without everyone in the office being admin. Sure it works for a normal user for a month until it decides it needs to upgrade, and _refuses_ to run unless you login as administrator and upgrade the stupid thing.
Heh, watch the "Dave Chapelle mac advert" (google for those keywords).
Um, you do know that StarOffice was made by Sun? An organization? Right?
Hmm, I doubt it. I would expect that they did it because its enjoyable and they are driven to do it. I'm not sure if they fully understand they decision they make, and chose to have another child.
The long-long term view is a bit depressing, but I'll be loooooong dead by then. I don't think it's that silly to expect that we might have power to keep ourselves alive after a few billion years.
Down that road is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism - and you don't want to go there.
I can see your point that without a God, then what is the point in life? Why even bother living? I cannot give a satisfactory answer to that. But I think for most atheists the goal of improving humanity, and make humanity more powerful (control of environment, conquest of skies and space, etc) is a sufficient goal by itself.
Occam's razor is one possible 'answer' to Solipsism ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism ).
You should watch the selinux talks (which is a framework for linux to do what you say).
I remember there being a few problems, such as most apps talk to X, so you have to let that through, and then X connects to everything else, so it's like you have a big hole in your sieve.
Also it gets more difficult when you have shared memory etc.
http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/info/faq.cfm