Beats me. For personal use I prefer Eudora for 'just email' on a Windows platform, and Pine on a Unix platform. The plain MAIL(1) command is cool, too (it works on all the solaris boxes at work, believe it or not, i.e. my_company_id@any.random.solaris.box send email, including Unix pipes, to anywhere on the net- sometimes useful, generally real cool)
But the above 'groupware' packages are stuffed full of other stuff. Scheduling up the ying-yang and such (when setting up a meeting, make sure you email an invite to the meeting room's email account so the room is reserved, etc. etc.) All horrendously complicated and it's no surprise that the email part itself gets shoved over to a corner and neglected.
Please either provide links to substantiate your claims. I'm not saying this to challange your truthfullness, but because I'd like to see evidence of said problems. I have machines running 95, 98, ME, and W2K on my home network. They all seem to happily get along.
Word for Windows 1.0 and 1.1 were pathetic, that is correct.
That's why most Word users on the PC Platform stuck with Word for DOS (5.0 and 5.5 mostly) for so long, while our bretheren used Wordperfect (arguably better at the time). Word for Windows 2.0 isn't a really strong contender, but it has some amazing characteristics.
1. It incorporated a Visual Basic interpreter, which could be used to write small apps completely independent of Word as a word processor.
2. The actual Winword.exe file for Word for Windows 2 is a self-contained complete app. It's small enough to fit on a single 1.44 floppy diskette, and can be run on nearly any Windows platform just by copying the.exe to the hard drive or running it right from the floppy diskette. The functionality that works this portably even includes the embedded Visual Basic engine. Articles were published back in the day telling people how to turn the freely available 'demo' version of Winword 2 inside out, making it into a portable programming engine. All the bloatware features aren't present when running 'Winword on a floppy' but a heck of a lot is there. Try it sometime if you can get ahold of a Winword.exe verison 2.0. It probably even works great on WinE.
Remove all the vinyl insulated wiring from your car and replace it with rubber insulated wire. The Ford Motor Company doesn't provide a procedure for doing so? Damn them! They're ripping us all off!
I mean who really doesn't want to get a bunch of stuff free (more or less)with the op sys?
The people who want to charge you seperately for the stuff are a bit perturbed. Their revenue stream is, umm, endangered when Microsoft puts out a robust system.
You need to give it up. IE isn't a seperate package in any of the latest Microsoft OSes. The 'IE' executable is just the access point to the system DLLs that Microsoft has built so that many third party applications can make use of web technologies. You can't uninstall IE any more than you can suddenly decide you don't want any solid state electronics in a modern automobile.
I, personally, almost never use IE on my Windows 2000 system. I prefer Opera and I use Opera for all my web browsing. But when I want to save a web page and edit it later to just contain the info I want, I find it convenient to use Word 2000 to strip out stuff. Many third party apps make similar use of the 'web technologies' in Microsoft's newest OSes.
I'd certainly never use Netscape, it's a pitiful wreck compared to Opera 5.1 or IE 5. Mozilla will be worth checking out sometime in the not too distance future, but it's been feeble when I've tried it in the recent past.
The subject of the InfoGames text adventure came up in one of the PalmPilot usenet groups that I follow. The game is available to play with Javascript on Adam's official website. Unfortunately it doesn't let you save your game and continue, and the prospect of sitting online for a continuous single session to complete the game is daunting.
However, if you go to the site and dig around in the HTML for the game link you can figure out what the z-machine file for the game is, and it's easy to snatch a copy. I've now got it installed on my Visor with Frotz to play it.
Re:Good riddance to yet another bad business model
on
Eazel Come, Eazel Go?
·
· Score: 2
Nope.
That's just plain wrong.
You can use a pirated copy of MSVC++ and develop on a pirated copy of W2K. There's no band of clowns running around demanding 'show us the source' because you won't show them proof that you paid for your copy of MSVC++. It's very unlikely that Microsoft themselves will be bugging you(unless you become a big success, and in that case you just buy a MS shrinkwrapped box after the fact). It's far easier and cheaper to put out a Shareware title for Windows for reasons like this. There isn't a big $2000 startup cost before you can sell the first copy. And Microsoft doesn't have bands of zealots out there forcing you to 'open the source' if you don't have a MSVC recipt. (they do if you're a big enterprise, but here we're talking about small groups/individuals churning out closed-source shareware).
And unfortunately, in the frenzy of 'success' in the past year or so, all the free projects have been consolidated under the 'big tents' like OSDN and hAndover. When the big ship goes down, it'll take everything else with it.
Really sad. But the Debian community will offer a refuge for some.
Visual C and Visual Basic aren't third party tools. They aren't thrown in with the OS, of course. But they're not that expensive
If you really want expensive tools, you want Solaris (the free download doesn't include ANSI C) or any of the other proprietary Unixes. Price the C compiler for Digital Unix (the Dec Alpha OS that Compaq has now renamed some god-awful thing) sometime. Or the C compiler for HP-UX. (HP-UX itself has a $995 per seat license cost, without any development tools).
There's a reason GCC is popular on those platforms, and it has a lot to do with price.
We did that paper-tape-storage programming back when I was in High School. In about 1975. I don't remember there being any expensive time limits, but each job run did report how much CPU time it had consumed, and you COULD run your account out of time. The big expense in our terminal room (we had two teletypes, a CRT display and a 'fast' 300 baud Texas Instruments thermal paper terminal) was the termial paper for the fast terminal. I can remember the instructor saying 'ten cents a foot! don't waste paper!' So we mostly settled for the 110 baud teletypes and fought over the CRT display (also 300 baud).
There are many, many good proprietary compilers for embedded work. Most of them are darn good tools. It's a myth that everybody uses GCC in the embedded market.
There are even a number of other 'free' C compilers for embedded chips out there. The world does not revolve around GCC.
You should be going to school, not working at an operator-level job. If you love the tech, don't settle for a lowly position. Get an engineering degree, so you can get deeper into it. You won't regret it later, nor do you have to do it 'for the money.'
Slashdot Mirror
In the city of Minneapolis (and most other cities as well) it's illegal to use an extension cord in rental housing.
(my point? 'whatever.')
Beats me. For personal use I prefer Eudora for 'just email' on a Windows platform, and Pine on a Unix platform. The plain MAIL(1) command is cool, too (it works on all the solaris boxes at work, believe it or not, i.e. my_company_id@any.random.solaris.box send email, including Unix pipes, to anywhere on the net- sometimes useful, generally real cool)
But the above 'groupware' packages are stuffed full of other stuff. Scheduling up the ying-yang and such (when setting up a meeting, make sure you email an invite to the meeting room's email account so the room is reserved, etc. etc.) All horrendously complicated and it's no surprise that the email part itself gets shoved over to a corner and neglected.
Please either provide links to substantiate your claims. I'm not saying this to challange your truthfullness, but because I'd like to see evidence of said problems. I have machines running 95, 98, ME, and W2K on my home network. They all seem to happily get along.
Without links, all your comment reads as is FUD.
Word for Windows 1.0 and 1.1 were pathetic, that is correct.
.exe to the hard drive or running it right from the floppy diskette. The functionality that works this portably even includes the embedded Visual Basic engine. Articles were published back in the day telling people how to turn the freely available 'demo' version of Winword 2 inside out, making it into a portable programming engine. All the bloatware features aren't present when running 'Winword on a floppy' but a heck of a lot is there. Try it sometime if you can get ahold of a Winword.exe verison 2.0. It probably even works great on WinE.
That's why most Word users on the PC Platform stuck with Word for DOS (5.0 and 5.5 mostly) for so long, while our bretheren used Wordperfect (arguably better at the time). Word for Windows 2.0 isn't a really strong contender, but it has some amazing characteristics.
1. It incorporated a Visual Basic interpreter, which could be used to write small apps completely independent of Word as a word processor.
2. The actual Winword.exe file for Word for Windows 2 is a self-contained complete app. It's small enough to fit on a single 1.44 floppy diskette, and can be run on nearly any Windows platform just by copying the
You really don't have a clue, it seems.
The competitors with Outlook/Exchange are Groupwise, Lotus Notes, etc. Collaborative groupware is much more than an email client.
Remove all the vinyl insulated wiring from your car and replace it with rubber insulated wire. The Ford Motor Company doesn't provide a procedure for doing so? Damn them! They're ripping us all off!
I mean who really doesn't want to get a bunch of stuff free (more or less)with the op sys?
The people who want to charge you seperately for the stuff are a bit perturbed. Their revenue stream is, umm, endangered when Microsoft puts out a robust system.
You need to give it up. IE isn't a seperate package in any of the latest Microsoft OSes. The 'IE' executable is just the access point to the system DLLs that Microsoft has built so that many third party applications can make use of web technologies. You can't uninstall IE any more than you can suddenly decide you don't want any solid state electronics in a modern automobile.
I, personally, almost never use IE on my Windows 2000 system. I prefer Opera and I use Opera for all my web browsing. But when I want to save a web page and edit it later to just contain the info I want, I find it convenient to use Word 2000 to strip out stuff. Many third party apps make similar use of the 'web technologies' in Microsoft's newest OSes.
I'd certainly never use Netscape, it's a pitiful wreck compared to Opera 5.1 or IE 5. Mozilla will be worth checking out sometime in the not too distance future, but it's been feeble when I've tried it in the recent past.
Here's the URL to grab the Game File which can then be played on any emulator.
(In text form: http://www.douglasadams.com/creations/hhgg.z5 )
Makes room for another great artist to be born, obviously.
The subject of the InfoGames text adventure came up in one of the PalmPilot usenet groups that I follow. The game is available to play with Javascript on Adam's official website. Unfortunately it doesn't let you save your game and continue, and the prospect of sitting online for a continuous single session to complete the game is daunting.
However, if you go to the site and dig around in the HTML for the game link you can figure out what the z-machine file for the game is, and it's easy to snatch a copy. I've now got it installed on my Visor with Frotz to play it.
Nope.
That's just plain wrong.
You can use a pirated copy of MSVC++ and develop on a pirated copy of W2K. There's no band of clowns running around demanding 'show us the source' because you won't show them proof that you paid for your copy of MSVC++. It's very unlikely that Microsoft themselves will be bugging you(unless you become a big success, and in that case you just buy a MS shrinkwrapped box after the fact). It's far easier and cheaper to put out a Shareware title for Windows for reasons like this. There isn't a big $2000 startup cost before you can sell the first copy. And Microsoft doesn't have bands of zealots out there forcing you to 'open the source' if you don't have a MSVC recipt. (they do if you're a big enterprise, but here we're talking about small groups/individuals churning out closed-source shareware).
And unfortunately, in the frenzy of 'success' in the past year or so, all the free projects have been consolidated under the 'big tents' like OSDN and hAndover. When the big ship goes down, it'll take everything else with it.
Really sad. But the Debian community will offer a refuge for some.
Visual C and Visual Basic aren't third party tools. They aren't thrown in with the OS, of course. But they're not that expensive
If you really want expensive tools, you want Solaris (the free download doesn't include ANSI C) or any of the other proprietary Unixes. Price the C compiler for Digital Unix (the Dec Alpha OS that Compaq has now renamed some god-awful thing) sometime. Or the C compiler for HP-UX. (HP-UX itself has a $995 per seat license cost, without any development tools).
There's a reason GCC is popular on those platforms, and it has a lot to do with price.
There's already bwBASIC which is GPL'd. It's written in C and builds on all the free Unices.
We did that paper-tape-storage programming back when I was in High School. In about 1975. I don't remember there being any expensive time limits, but each job run did report how much CPU time it had consumed, and you COULD run your account out of time. The big expense in our terminal room (we had two teletypes, a CRT display and a 'fast' 300 baud Texas Instruments thermal paper terminal) was the termial paper for the fast terminal. I can remember the instructor saying 'ten cents a foot! don't waste paper!' So we mostly settled for the 110 baud teletypes and fought over the CRT display (also 300 baud).
There are many, many good proprietary compilers for embedded work. Most of them are darn good tools. It's a myth that everybody uses GCC in the embedded market.
There are even a number of other 'free' C compilers for embedded chips out there. The world does not revolve around GCC.
You should be going to school, not working at an operator-level job. If you love the tech, don't settle for a lowly position. Get an engineering degree, so you can get deeper into it. You won't regret it later, nor do you have to do it 'for the money.'
Okay, rewrite:
'While it's still got potential for licensing as soda pop artwork at Taco Bell.'
I'm inspired! And the White Castle is on the way home.....
I liked Star Wars too. Saw it in the theatre when it first came out. I liked it enough that I haven't seen any of the sequels, which would spoil it.
I think he meant the WWF.
The WWF entertains rednecks. The W3C... umm... consumes office supplies.
Malda is running Slashdot?
You coulda fooled me. I thought Timmah and lil' Mikey had taken it over.
(the fanboys who crowd in once something becomes a going thing are frightening to behold)
What the hell? ST:TOS??
It was called Star Trek. You don't have permission to rename it.
(though, since I'm not immersed in the trekkie community, they probably already have. *sigh*)
It's illegal for anybody but the official postal carrier to deliver letters into anybody's mailbox.