It is noisy, it says that it cannot communicate with the remote site because SSL 2.0 is disabled, tho it could be more clear about why SSL 2.0 is a bad idea, as the current error message will just encourage people to turn it back on.
Bear in mind also, that beta versions of apache are publicly available for people to find bugs in, whereas all the security holes which get removed from beta versions of iis are kept secret.
That's more the fault of proprietary software vendors than the alpha architecture.. If you run an opensource OS and compile opensource apps on it, you`l have a lot more success.. Most linux apps compile and run very well on alpha systems
Alpha could have got us away from x86 a few years ago, when the alpha could emulate x86 and still beat it performance wise.. Unfortunately, it was too expensive and could only run win32 and x86/linux apps, while many people had win16 and 16-bit dos apps... Had they maintained development, it might have been feasible more recently with far less people needing win16/dos compatibility and such compatibility could be implemented via a full system emulation like bochs or qemu.
Well the opendocument format is decided upon by a committee, if your feature is worthwhile and well thought out then it`s highly likely to be included in the next version.
And the microsoft formats are very specific to their applications, and yet openoffice supports them.. Also, microsoft claims that compatibility with older office applications are important, and yet their xml format is not compatible with versions prior to 2003 and their binary format has many incompatibilities between versions both forwards and backwards.
But for-profit software development is an artificially inflated industry.. Software can be produced at little or no cost and doesn't deserve the high prices that are being charged, especially for mass market software. It will get commoditized naturally, as did hardware (which is now much cheaper and far more powerfull than it was 20 years ago)
Opendocument will store the image in it's original format, inside of the opendocument zipfile container.. The quality and filesize won't change atall, ofcourse the document will increase in size by the size of the image itself (less any compression the zip format achieves)
It's partially true, opendocument does not have it's own format for storing pictures like microsoft's formats do.. Instead, it stores the picture in whatever format it was originally (jpeg, png, gif etc). Since opendocument is basically a zipfile, you can simply unzip it and retrieve the pictures in their original format. Part of the design goal of opendocument was to use existing standards wherever possible.. So it seems that here, microsoft is just trying to twist this around to suit their own ends. I`m sure if someone invented a car that ran on air, microsoft would complain that it didn't have a gas tank.
Which only means that their erosion of market share will be slowed for the time being... Once opendocument has sufficient market share it will become a liability for your business to not support it, and then ms will have to either support the format or risk losing marketshare much more rapidly.
Well, the original staroffice format was totally rewritten for openoffice with the goal of being open and xml based, and then when they submitted it to oasis for approval as a standard, oasis suggested some changes and those changes were made, hence we have the opendocument standard.. When the standard was being developed, the process was totally open for anyone to see and participate in, suggestions from a number of vendors were taken on board for the format and microsoft were invited to participate in the development of opendocument, but simply chose not to.
Because if the formats are the same, then people would have true choice.. The choice would be between: msoffice for $500 with no support or accountability (just the false impression of it) openoffice for $0 with no support or accountability, but any third party could sell you support staroffice for $50 with support but no accountability (and maybe the false impression of it)
Actually, it is possible to write malicious macro's for openoffice just as it is for msoffice... although it will actually warn you when you open a document containing macros.
However, the missing functionality the article talks about is the ability to embed video and audio for instance, which i believe is a false argument... There is no point converting an attached video or audio file into a new format, the openoffice approach of keeping the file in it's original format (just as it does with images) is a very smart move... what's the point in creating new formats when open standards already exist? the only reason the opendocument format exists is because there wasn't previously an open format for word processing or spreadsheets etc.
He also states: "this proposal acknowledges that Open Document does not address pictures, audio, video, charts, maps, voice, voice-over-IP, and other kinds of data our customers are increasingly putting in documents and archiving."
how would you put voice-over-ip into a word processing document? if it's stored in a file then it's not exactly travelling over ip anymore.. it's merely a voice recording in a file, for which many formats already exist.. As for voice, audio, video, pictures etc, there are already documented open standards for such files, and opendocument will include these files in their original format inside the zip container.. what's the point of converting existing open formats into an xml representation of the same format?
Ofcourse they can, they just have to make the sourcecode available, which it already is via openoffice... the only reason staroffice was based from a slightly different codebase was because some of the components used in the original staroffice weren't owned by sun and couldn't be open sourced.. Now that those parts have been replaced, there's no reason sun can't make staroffice completely using openoffice sourcecode.
The government should benefit it's taxpayers as much as possible, and not waste their money on expensive items when cheaper (or free) ones will do the same.. Governments should support local businesses and local labour as much as possible, afterall some of the wages they pay them will come back as tax anyway, if they pay money to a business from far away they won't get any of it back.
You can have websites that contain bitmapped images too, just because someone can misuse the format doesn't mean the format is at fault.. supporting bitmapped images is a valid feature. Printing the bitmapped images will actually result in very poor quality output since they're resolution limited, whereas downloading postscript fonts to the printer will work much better. Ofcourse, if there's a pdf writer so poorly written that it stores text as a bitmap, then the authors of it should be shot.
Same thing has happened to me, but with discontinued software that the vendor will no longer support in any way shape or form.. In your case, i would have pirated the latest quickbooks, converted my data to some other format (if possible) and imported it into some other app.. and then never given intuit any more of my money in the future.
If openoffice crashes on you, you can report a bug and watch the progress as it's fixed... Alternatively, you can buy staroffice from sun, or sun will even sell you support for openoffice now. If you want paid support for openoffice, you can get it from several vendors including sun, if you don't want to pay you don't have to.. Contrast this to the microsoft approach, where you pay for the software, and then pay extra for support. I know many people and companies who use msoffice, and none of them have ever filed a bug report, they're more likely to find a nasty kludgy workaround because they realise that reporting bugs to microsoft is a fruitless exercise.. Just recently a colleague of mine encountered a nasty bug in the line counting functions when writing word macros... a google search revealed that the bug has been known for 8 years and never fixed. When you file a bug report, you hear nothing about it, you can't see the status of the bug, you can't track the development process and you can't fix it yourself.
Why not try the unix "file" command on an openoffice document, it will reveal that the document is infact a zipfile.. Yes that's right, just because a filename doesnt end with ".zip" doesn't mean it's not a zipfile.. JAR (java archive) files are the same, a zipped up collection of files.. if your on windows, you can rename an openoffice document so it ends with.zip and unzip it using any tool such as winzip, then you can manually edit the xml inside, or view/edit the images (they will be stored as seperate files in whatever format they were originally, such as jpeg or png) If your on unix, you can just unzip the file, unix programs don't care about such trivial user-controlled information like the filename.
Slashdot Mirror
It is noisy, it says that it cannot communicate with the remote site because SSL 2.0 is disabled, tho it could be more clear about why SSL 2.0 is a bad idea, as the current error message will just encourage people to turn it back on.
Bear in mind also, that beta versions of apache are publicly available for people to find bugs in, whereas all the security holes which get removed from beta versions of iis are kept secret.
That's more the fault of proprietary software vendors than the alpha architecture..
If you run an opensource OS and compile opensource apps on it, you`l have a lot more success.. Most linux apps compile and run very well on alpha systems
Alpha could have got us away from x86 a few years ago, when the alpha could emulate x86 and still beat it performance wise..
Unfortunately, it was too expensive and could only run win32 and x86/linux apps, while many people had win16 and 16-bit dos apps... Had they maintained development, it might have been feasible more recently with far less people needing win16/dos compatibility and such compatibility could be implemented via a full system emulation like bochs or qemu.
MacOS doesn`t support OLE2 either, and some of the msoffice apps were originally written for the mac!
Well the opendocument format is decided upon by a committee, if your feature is worthwhile and well thought out then it`s highly likely to be included in the next version.
And the microsoft formats are very specific to their applications, and yet openoffice supports them..
Also, microsoft claims that compatibility with older office applications are important, and yet their xml format is not compatible with versions prior to 2003 and their binary format has many incompatibilities between versions both forwards and backwards.
But for-profit software development is an artificially inflated industry.. Software can be produced at little or no cost and doesn't deserve the high prices that are being charged, especially for mass market software. It will get commoditized naturally, as did hardware (which is now much cheaper and far more powerfull than it was 20 years ago)
Opendocument will store the image in it's original format, inside of the opendocument zipfile container.. The quality and filesize won't change atall, ofcourse the document will increase in size by the size of the image itself (less any compression the zip format achieves)
Absoloutely.. i also think web browsers and html authoring programs should flag up warnings when they detect html which doesn't follow the standards..
It's partially true, opendocument does not have it's own format for storing pictures like microsoft's formats do..
Instead, it stores the picture in whatever format it was originally (jpeg, png, gif etc). Since opendocument is basically a zipfile, you can simply unzip it and retrieve the pictures in their original format. Part of the design goal of opendocument was to use existing standards wherever possible..
So it seems that here, microsoft is just trying to twist this around to suit their own ends. I`m sure if someone invented a car that ran on air, microsoft would complain that it didn't have a gas tank.
Which only means that their erosion of market share will be slowed for the time being...
Once opendocument has sufficient market share it will become a liability for your business to not support it, and then ms will have to either support the format or risk losing marketshare much more rapidly.
Well, the original staroffice format was totally rewritten for openoffice with the goal of being open and xml based, and then when they submitted it to oasis for approval as a standard, oasis suggested some changes and those changes were made, hence we have the opendocument standard..
When the standard was being developed, the process was totally open for anyone to see and participate in, suggestions from a number of vendors were taken on board for the format and microsoft were invited to participate in the development of opendocument, but simply chose not to.
Because if the formats are the same, then people would have true choice..
The choice would be between:
msoffice for $500 with no support or accountability (just the false impression of it)
openoffice for $0 with no support or accountability, but any third party could sell you support
staroffice for $50 with support but no accountability (and maybe the false impression of it)
What would you choose?
Actually, it is possible to write malicious macro's for openoffice just as it is for msoffice... although it will actually warn you when you open a document containing macros.
However, the missing functionality the article talks about is the ability to embed video and audio for instance, which i believe is a false argument...
There is no point converting an attached video or audio file into a new format, the openoffice approach of keeping the file in it's original format (just as it does with images) is a very smart move...
what's the point in creating new formats when open standards already exist? the only reason the opendocument format exists is because there wasn't previously an open format for word processing or spreadsheets etc.
He also states:
"this proposal acknowledges that Open Document does not address pictures, audio, video, charts, maps, voice, voice-over-IP, and other kinds of data our customers are increasingly putting in documents and archiving."
how would you put voice-over-ip into a word processing document? if it's stored in a file then it's not exactly travelling over ip anymore.. it's merely a voice recording in a file, for which many formats already exist..
As for voice, audio, video, pictures etc, there are already documented open standards for such files, and opendocument will include these files in their original format inside the zip container.. what's the point of converting existing open formats into an xml representation of the same format?
Ofcourse they can, they just have to make the sourcecode available, which it already is via openoffice... the only reason staroffice was based from a slightly different codebase was because some of the components used in the original staroffice weren't owned by sun and couldn't be open sourced.. Now that those parts have been replaced, there's no reason sun can't make staroffice completely using openoffice sourcecode.
The government should benefit it's taxpayers as much as possible, and not waste their money on expensive items when cheaper (or free) ones will do the same..
Governments should support local businesses and local labour as much as possible, afterall some of the wages they pay them will come back as tax anyway, if they pay money to a business from far away they won't get any of it back.
There is NeoOffice/J, a native port of openoffice 1.x to mac, openoffice 2.x is quite a way off however..
You can have websites that contain bitmapped images too, just because someone can misuse the format doesn't mean the format is at fault.. supporting bitmapped images is a valid feature.
Printing the bitmapped images will actually result in very poor quality output since they're resolution limited, whereas downloading postscript fonts to the printer will work much better. Ofcourse, if there's a pdf writer so poorly written that it stores text as a bitmap, then the authors of it should be shot.
There are many other viewer for pdf files, OSX comes with a nice one called "preview", i`ve never had the need to install adobe reader on my macs..
Same thing has happened to me, but with discontinued software that the vendor will no longer support in any way shape or form..
In your case, i would have pirated the latest quickbooks, converted my data to some other format (if possible) and imported it into some other app.. and then never given intuit any more of my money in the future.
If openoffice crashes on you, you can report a bug and watch the progress as it's fixed...
Alternatively, you can buy staroffice from sun, or sun will even sell you support for openoffice now. If you want paid support for openoffice, you can get it from several vendors including sun, if you don't want to pay you don't have to..
Contrast this to the microsoft approach, where you pay for the software, and then pay extra for support. I know many people and companies who use msoffice, and none of them have ever filed a bug report, they're more likely to find a nasty kludgy workaround because they realise that reporting bugs to microsoft is a fruitless exercise.. Just recently a colleague of mine encountered a nasty bug in the line counting functions when writing word macros... a google search revealed that the bug has been known for 8 years and never fixed. When you file a bug report, you hear nothing about it, you can't see the status of the bug, you can't track the development process and you can't fix it yourself.
That's the fault of word rather than openoffice then, that exec should have been able to trust his software to not send the changes he'd removed.
Why not try the unix "file" command on an openoffice document, it will reveal that the document is infact a zipfile.. Yes that's right, just because a filename doesnt end with ".zip" doesn't mean it's not a zipfile.. .zip and unzip it using any tool such as winzip, then you can manually edit the xml inside, or view/edit the images (they will be stored as seperate files in whatever format they were originally, such as jpeg or png)
JAR (java archive) files are the same, a zipped up collection of files..
if your on windows, you can rename an openoffice document so it ends with
If your on unix, you can just unzip the file, unix programs don't care about such trivial user-controlled information like the filename.