And you allways got those victims of Microsoft-propaganda that believe the newest version is allways so much better.
Now I don't know what's better, the user doesn't know what it actually is that makes the newest version better, but he does know the newest version is better.
Now guess who has to install the latest version and break office-compatability, or indulge in a admin-user flamewar when these people enter the IT-dept....
Is Perl included? Can you easily write your own scripts?
Yeah, ofcourse man! I mean, who would release an Office package for the mainstream without perl and scripting support? That's the one feature that everyone needs.
After they learn about locating their own files on the harddisk, that is.
Office is by far the best productivity suite available and the most widely accepted.
No and yes. It's might be the best package when it comes to cooperation between the programs, when it comes to intuitivity, though it can be argued thats because everyone allready knows how MsOffice works. In fact Im pretty sure that any office-package not behaving exactly like MsOffice would be claimed to be less intuitive. Because everyone knows how MsOffice works.
But let's call these things technicalities. My beef is with another part of the package. A part which usually is unseen for most users, but nevertheless presents a problem.
Let's say we take a look at MsWord, for example. My first encounter must have been with version 2. The documents were labeled with the extension.doc. Take a look at the newest version, still suffixed with.doc.
Does anyone know what the actual diffferences in the file format is? Have you ever tried exchanging documents with people working with older version of MsOffice? If not, let me tell you right away that hell will arise.
The newest version of Office will recognise the documents, and open them without any indication that it is treating a depricated format.
In some cases (no deep research conducted here, on my part) if you edit the document, and save it, and return it to the sender, it will remain in the old format. However, sometimes (if you use some new features, or god knows why) it will save the document in the new Office format. All without any warning.
Now guess what will hapeen if you cooperate on some work between Office versions. The incompatabilities between the different versions of the fileformats risks rendering your work totally useless.
And Microsoft really haven't seemed that eager to document the formats at all or their differences.
So to my point. One version of Office works fine. Yes. To different versions hardly work at all.
And their is no telling what the differences is, or have you can avoid the trouble of encountering them.
And yes, I know you can choose "Save as... (Word 95,3,2,....-file) every time you need to communicate with other versions, but how can you know what version the recipient will have, and what design/flow-coontrol-features will be disabled when you save in an older format?
Office, kinda like Windows, like things very homegeneous.
the theory that "if anyone discovers just exactly what the universe is for and why we are here, that it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable"
Since when did Douglas Adams ficitonal rants become valid scientific theories?
Or do you also believe in the theory of Italian bistromath (totaly unaccountable for and random) or total improbability (it's not probable that you should be specificly any specific place in the univerese, so you're actually everywhere) can be used for anything useful?
Hey. It's a funny way of being quasi-scientific, but I don't see where this fits in a sciencediscussion. Or did my irony-sensor just fail completely? Nah.
It has taken me 7 years to locate, download, catalog, sort, and store 11 GB of porno.
Lol! I think regardless of parent discussion can agree on that collecting porn truly takes dedication!
Btw./me has used less than a year to get hold of 6-7 GB of porn, but movies kinda takes more space than pictures, but if your fine with jpg's thats all fine with me:)
And university-class 100mbit lines and internal p2p-networks saves you time. Now you know.
Janet Jackson gave us a clear demonstration last week of just how hung up a good proportion of the USA is. In many other nations, this incident would have barely raised any eyebrows, but in the US it's apparently world war three.
Yes. It is true. We now know for a fact that there is no country in the world that is even remotely close to being as hopeless as the US.
Short summary: In the US war is merely entertainment. Janet (Crackpipe? Or whatever shes taking...) Jackson shows a boob, and the puritans take over the country, demanding cable-networks gagged and cencored. And search engines clogged down in pain.
Because we're the world experts in free-market capitalism. We're the ones who made it work when everyone else failed. Our economy is by far the most liberal of the industrialized countries. In those respects, at least, everyone in the world wants to be like us.
I guess you have empirical material to back this statement up? In case you don't, shut up, will you?
There is no country in the world with an economy which is going down at a rate like yours. In case you should ever forget, this site is a good reminder.
Your country is obviously not interested in making money, just spending it. Personally I believe most people in the world would want their countries to do the opposite.
But, hey, if you believe your own statement, you are probably exactly as easy to manipulate as your goverment wants you to be. It's called patriotic, so cheers! Your a true patriot!
If they were stupid enough to think that movie theaters, radio stations and music discs were an eternal cash-cow while using their profits to build castles in the sand, well... give them a Darwin Award.
That's by far the best comment I've heard in this thread so far!
Anyone a little bit less lazy than me, and bother to submit the proposal?:)
It's gotten to the point that just by using IE you are pretty much guaranteed to get spyware/adware/virus. Most of the people I know who use IE have their homepage changed daily, get a new toolbar every two days, so many pop ups they have to reboot weekly, their email stolen from cookies hourly, and a partridge in a pear tree.
Do I take it that most people you know using IE are immensly stupid as well?
Ok. IE is insecure, but if you have any wits whatsoever, you'll smell a fishy site when it comes along.
Oh. And I am surfing safely protected using Opera. I just like the feel better than Mozilla, that's all.
Why should CD-burning be a privilegied operation? Well... I dunno, but last I checked it was so in Windows 2k & XP. You'll need a properly configured Nero BurnRights to be able to burn CDs/DVDs as a ordinary user.
Not that this answers your question at all (the link may), but heck, it's not like it's all that different in Windows.
Nice "I don't like security applied"-troll. As for mime-types, I agree though.
And for that neverending what office-suite is the best... I never bothered to upgrade beyond Office97. There were only bloat to catch it seemed. And OpenOffice performs quite well compared to Office97.
Some people obviously could make it work. But I didn't. Being the most uber geek on the planet shouldn't be necassery to get a MP3 player working.
Windows: Install. Ok.
Linux/BSD: Install this, compile this, platform specify this, test this package? works? and then for five or six additional packages. In the end? No response.
Sorry. I love unix more than any OS, but I need my hardware working. When I can't get that proper, I'll have to manage with a semi-proffesional OS like Windows. Which I must admit, is kinda weird.
I know this really isn't a popular opinion around here, but still, it needs to be said.
While it's true Windows isn't really the state of the art platform when it comes to security, it beat's Linux when it comes to a few key issues. Like hardware support.
Yes. I know. Hardware support in Linux isn't that bad, but still you encounter hardware you simply cannot get working under Linux. This isn't exactly a flaw in Linux, but for all hardware that is developed, you can swear the vendor will release Windows-drivers that makes hardware support a non-issue.
And as far as voting with your wallet goes, you really never can tell it's an issue before you try it. This goes for my MP3-player (Creative). I couldn't get it working under any Linux or *BSD platform.
Back to the issue. Running Windows securely really only requires you to configure the system properly. Like disabling all unnecassery services (Universal PnP, Remote assistance, remote registry and so on...), and using none-Microsoft products. Like Mozilla or Opera for web-browsing.
As much as we all love to hate Windows, it can be configured to operate decently. But in the name of "user-friendlyness" it configured to be insecure by default.
PS: What on EARTH is up with IE's css support? is it intentionally designed to be completely broken?
I know this is offtopic flamebait, but hell it's so likely to be true...
I believe Microsoft intentionally has a slightly broken CSS, so that everything that looks good in IE will look crappy in any standard-compliant browser.
C'mon, it's not that crazy! We all know which mother has the marketshare's here.
It's not like most people even know there are standard's anyway. "People" use FrontPage, or even worse, Word to make webpages these days, remember?
So yes, I believe IEs CSS-support (or the CSS-support in any Microsoft product) to be intentionally broken. To gain marketshare. And that's paranoid me.
Btw, my W3C-validated, visually confirmed (opera, mozilla) good webpages look like shit in IE. And, no I don't bother to make IE-CSS.
In an ideal, standardized world where W3C-specs were followed, and no-one sought to conquer the entire web trough non-standard HTML-extensions and market-dominance...
In such a pretty and ideal place, you wouldn't have to develop different sites for different browsers. You are making yourself the extra work, by supporting none-standards. No sympathy for you, my friend. No sympathy for the devil, indeed.
As a slashdotter I thought you knew that IE is more or less a Win32-only product. And there's a hell lot more to the internet than Win32.
Anyone excusing their IE-support with sheer marketdominance has obviously ridden themselves of all the principles the net was founded on. But I guess that is ok, since most IE-users wouldn't know.
How dumb can people be and still be accounted for as people? No, seriously? At some point you get retarded legally speaking, and are put to care (usually due to mental illness, but some people have extra cromosons and stuff. You know..).
So I repeat my question: How stupid can people get, while still being considered people?
Some recent lawsuits makes me think that smart people are an endagered species these days. We are obviously to be held accountable when stupid people fuck up, because whatever we did, we anticipated, well... some minimal sort of intelligence?
Sorry... This question just leaps to mind at regular intervals... And the intervals are getting smaller and smaller...
Yeah. It's time people stop doing that lame-as goatse-trolling, anyway. I mean, is that even fun, anymore? I, for once, think it's the most overused internet-trolling tool of all time.
Excuse me for supporting Mr. (Score:0,Troll), but doesn't he raise at least one valid point?
It's not like this is the first time Outlook and all it's features additional to mailhandling (which mostly is usefull only to spammers and virii-writers) causes complete havoc on the internet.
You'd think by now, Microsoft should have turned of all scripting and activex-support in their email-client to avoid all of this happening again?
After all, I can view HTML mail in Mozilla, Opera and Pine for god's sake. And still I have to admit no viri/worm/trojan has ever infected my machine.
So call him troll if you like, but he did (even though maybe in a flamefest fashion) ask the question that should be asked:
Why the hell is this email client still the biggest source of viruses on the internet?
If this should ever become a practical possibility, don't you think that the stupidity of current copyright-laws would be obvious enough for people in general to react?
I think that when things get this bad, revisions will be made, or have been made allready.
Unless a global, hellish corporate goverment has arised as the new feudal overlords. But I kinda don't like the thought of that...
Slashdot Mirror
And you allways got those victims of Microsoft-propaganda that believe the newest version is allways so much better.
Now I don't know what's better, the user doesn't know what it actually is that makes the newest version better, but he does know the newest version is better.
Now guess who has to install the latest version and break office-compatability, or indulge in a admin-user flamewar when these people enter the IT-dept....
Yeah, ofcourse man! I mean, who would release an Office package for the mainstream without perl and scripting support? That's the one feature that everyone needs.
After they learn about locating their own files on the harddisk, that is.
No and yes. It's might be the best package when it comes to cooperation between the programs, when it comes to intuitivity, though it can be argued thats because everyone allready knows how MsOffice works. In fact Im pretty sure that any office-package not behaving exactly like MsOffice would be claimed to be less intuitive. Because everyone knows how MsOffice works.
But let's call these things technicalities. My beef is with another part of the package. A part which usually is unseen for most users, but nevertheless presents a problem.
Let's say we take a look at MsWord, for example. My first encounter must have been with version 2. The documents were labeled with the extension .doc. Take a look at the newest version, still suffixed with .doc.
Does anyone know what the actual diffferences in the file format is? Have you ever tried exchanging documents with people working with older version of MsOffice? If not, let me tell you right away that hell will arise.
The newest version of Office will recognise the documents, and open them without any indication that it is treating a depricated format.
In some cases (no deep research conducted here, on my part) if you edit the document, and save it, and return it to the sender, it will remain in the old format. However, sometimes (if you use some new features, or god knows why) it will save the document in the new Office format. All without any warning.
Now guess what will hapeen if you cooperate on some work between Office versions. The incompatabilities between the different versions of the fileformats risks rendering your work totally useless.
And Microsoft really haven't seemed that eager to document the formats at all or their differences.
So to my point. One version of Office works fine. Yes. To different versions hardly work at all.
And their is no telling what the differences is, or have you can avoid the trouble of encountering them.
And yes, I know you can choose "Save as... (Word 95,3,2,....-file) every time you need to communicate with other versions, but how can you know what version the recipient will have, and what design/flow-coontrol-features will be disabled when you save in an older format?
Office, kinda like Windows, like things very homegeneous.
Since when did Douglas Adams ficitonal rants become valid scientific theories?
Or do you also believe in the theory of Italian bistromath (totaly unaccountable for and random) or total improbability (it's not probable that you should be specificly any specific place in the univerese, so you're actually everywhere) can be used for anything useful?
Hey. It's a funny way of being quasi-scientific, but I don't see where this fits in a sciencediscussion. Or did my irony-sensor just fail completely? Nah.
Lol! I think regardless of parent discussion can agree on that collecting porn truly takes dedication!
Btw. /me has used less than a year to get hold of 6-7 GB of porn, but movies kinda takes more space than pictures, but if your fine with jpg's thats all fine with me :)
And university-class 100mbit lines and internal p2p-networks saves you time. Now you know.
Yes. It is true. We now know for a fact that there is no country in the world that is even remotely close to being as hopeless as the US.
Short summary: In the US war is merely entertainment. Janet (Crackpipe? Or whatever shes taking...) Jackson shows a boob, and the puritans take over the country, demanding cable-networks gagged and cencored. And search engines clogged down in pain.
Hopeless times these truly are.
I guess you have empirical material to back this statement up? In case you don't, shut up, will you?
There is no country in the world with an economy which is going down at a rate like yours. In case you should ever forget, this site is a good reminder.
Your country is obviously not interested in making money, just spending it. Personally I believe most people in the world would want their countries to do the opposite.
But, hey, if you believe your own statement, you are probably exactly as easy to manipulate as your goverment wants you to be. It's called patriotic, so cheers! Your a true patriot!
Is this moded +5 Funny, because we all have given in and realised that this is the future?
I mean, it's not funny! It's not even unlikely with the development we see worldwide these days (weak goverments, mighty corporations).
I'd give this post +5, Apocalyptical yet realistic, but for some odd reason that moderation doesn't exist... Oh. And now I can't moderate.
That's by far the best comment I've heard in this thread so far!
Anyone a little bit less lazy than me, and bother to submit the proposal? :)
Do I take it that most people you know using IE are immensly stupid as well?
Ok. IE is insecure, but if you have any wits whatsoever, you'll smell a fishy site when it comes along.
Oh. And I am surfing safely protected using Opera. I just like the feel better than Mozilla, that's all.
Even worse. Macintosh is endorsed by hippies :)
Why should CD-burning be a privilegied operation? Well... I dunno, but last I checked it was so in Windows 2k & XP. You'll need a properly configured Nero BurnRights to be able to burn CDs/DVDs as a ordinary user.
Not that this answers your question at all (the link may), but heck, it's not like it's all that different in Windows.
Nice "I don't like security applied"-troll. As for mime-types, I agree though.
And for that neverending what office-suite is the best... I never bothered to upgrade beyond Office97. There were only bloat to catch it seemed. And OpenOffice performs quite well compared to Office97.
I bet there's gotta be some old phreakers here, who still knows how to do the job :)
This discussion is probably long dead, but just to clear things up a little:
a hardware external Creative Jukebox Zen 30GB harddrive MP3-player.
Jeez. Do people here really think I can't handle a simple XMMS-install? :-(
You think I didn't?
Some people obviously could make it work. But I didn't. Being the most uber geek on the planet shouldn't be necassery to get a MP3 player working.
Windows: Install. Ok.
Linux/BSD: Install this, compile this, platform specify this, test this package? works? and then for five or six additional packages. In the end? No response.
Sorry. I love unix more than any OS, but I need my hardware working. When I can't get that proper, I'll have to manage with a semi-proffesional OS like Windows. Which I must admit, is kinda weird.
I know this really isn't a popular opinion around here, but still, it needs to be said.
While it's true Windows isn't really the state of the art platform when it comes to security, it beat's Linux when it comes to a few key issues. Like hardware support.
Yes. I know. Hardware support in Linux isn't that bad, but still you encounter hardware you simply cannot get working under Linux. This isn't exactly a flaw in Linux, but for all hardware that is developed, you can swear the vendor will release Windows-drivers that makes hardware support a non-issue.
And as far as voting with your wallet goes, you really never can tell it's an issue before you try it. This goes for my MP3-player (Creative). I couldn't get it working under any Linux or *BSD platform.
Back to the issue. Running Windows securely really only requires you to configure the system properly. Like disabling all unnecassery services (Universal PnP, Remote assistance, remote registry and so on...), and using none-Microsoft products. Like Mozilla or Opera for web-browsing.
As much as we all love to hate Windows, it can be configured to operate decently. But in the name of "user-friendlyness" it configured to be insecure by default.
And there goes my karma.
I know this is offtopic flamebait, but hell it's so likely to be true...
I believe Microsoft intentionally has a slightly broken CSS, so that everything that looks good in IE will look crappy in any standard-compliant browser.
C'mon, it's not that crazy! We all know which mother has the marketshare's here.
It's not like most people even know there are standard's anyway. "People" use FrontPage, or even worse, Word to make webpages these days, remember?
So yes, I believe IEs CSS-support (or the CSS-support in any Microsoft product) to be intentionally broken. To gain marketshare. And that's paranoid me.
Btw, my W3C-validated, visually confirmed (opera, mozilla) good webpages look like shit in IE. And, no I don't bother to make IE-CSS.
In an ideal, standardized world where W3C-specs were followed, and no-one sought to conquer the entire web trough non-standard HTML-extensions and market-dominance...
In such a pretty and ideal place, you wouldn't have to develop different sites for different browsers. You are making yourself the extra work, by supporting none-standards. No sympathy for you, my friend. No sympathy for the devil, indeed.
As a slashdotter I thought you knew that IE is more or less a Win32-only product. And there's a hell lot more to the internet than Win32.
Anyone excusing their IE-support with sheer marketdominance has obviously ridden themselves of all the principles the net was founded on. But I guess that is ok, since most IE-users wouldn't know.
How dumb can people be and still be accounted for as people? No, seriously? At some point you get retarded legally speaking, and are put to care (usually due to mental illness, but some people have extra cromosons and stuff. You know..).
So I repeat my question: How stupid can people get, while still being considered people?
Some recent lawsuits makes me think that smart people are an endagered species these days. We are obviously to be held accountable when stupid people fuck up, because whatever we did, we anticipated, well... some minimal sort of intelligence?
Sorry... This question just leaps to mind at regular intervals... And the intervals are getting smaller and smaller...
Yeah. It's time people stop doing that lame-as goatse-trolling, anyway. I mean, is that even fun, anymore? I, for once, think it's the most overused internet-trolling tool of all time.
And like you said, people can check the links....
All who agree, please sign this "stop goatse"-petition!
And to get this infection to stick properly you'd have to open the attachment as root.
Yes. We all do that all the time.
Sorry. I know this is really off-topic, but still... People need to know goatse lives on, for whatever trolling or shocking needs :)
Goatse-takedown notice and the real deal
So now you know :)
This should work even better. It was in some thread up there, but it seems like it got lost. Look for the &-sign :)
#!/bin/shwhile
do
wget -r -l10 http://www.sco.com -O
done
exit 0; # really unnecessary
Excuse me for supporting Mr. (Score:0,Troll), but doesn't he raise at least one valid point?
It's not like this is the first time Outlook and all it's features additional to mailhandling (which mostly is usefull only to spammers and virii-writers) causes complete havoc on the internet.
You'd think by now, Microsoft should have turned of all scripting and activex-support in their email-client to avoid all of this happening again?
After all, I can view HTML mail in Mozilla, Opera and Pine for god's sake. And still I have to admit no viri/worm/trojan has ever infected my machine.
So call him troll if you like, but he did (even though maybe in a flamefest fashion) ask the question that should be asked:
Why the hell is this email client still the biggest source of viruses on the internet?
If this should ever become a practical possibility, don't you think that the stupidity of current copyright-laws would be obvious enough for people in general to react?
I think that when things get this bad, revisions will be made, or have been made allready.
Unless a global, hellish corporate goverment has arised as the new feudal overlords. But I kinda don't like the thought of that...