When Word 95 came out there were many people still using WordPerfect in business environments. In fact even today there are legacy record systems that still require WordPerfect format for archiving purposes. Like many people today, people were not just jumping to the latest and greatest OS and office suite. Businesses would require many more years before they left DOS and OS/2 at the time.
The ribbon is crap for the majority of users, especially if you have a small screen. When writing docs, most of the time should be spent on writing content, not formatting. The old style menu system reflects this. With the ribbon 95% of the time it's a waste of space which takes away from actual useful space for text editing.
Power users (like you I'd assume) might have a point, but 99% of MS Office users are not power users, and essentially use it as a typewriter with spell check.
so just double-click on any of the ribbon tabs to hide the entire ribbon.
Yes and no. Even between Office 2007 and 2010, documents don't always look the same... we have run into this for pretty simple documents. I have no idea why it's so ridiculously complicated that even the software provider can't get it right, but I'm guessing it has more to do with trying to intentionally hurt interoperability than anything else.
Call me a cynic, but I've been around for a very very long time and I've seen a lot of poor sportsmanship in the Microsoft camp.
The funny thing is now we're intentionally using older versions of MS Office simply because everyone hasn't learned the 2007 version yet, so what's the use of overloading everyone by going to the newest version every 2-3 years? The couple of users who will benefit can have the upgrade. The rest can have an upgrade every x versions.
if the document was generated or originated using pre-Office 97 formats, and were converted to Office 97-2003 formats, then there is still a chance that Office 2007 or Office 2010 can render differently. I would like to see an example where a native 2007 file looks different when opened in 2010. Yes, such examples exist, but I've only seen evidence of this produced by Microsoft in public disclosure to showcase a hypothetical. In practice 2007 and 2010 are effectively the same, with 2007 being pre-ISO OpenXML, and 2010 being ISO OpenXML.
Its not something that a typical developer can just decide to do on a weekend. To take an honest stab requires a foundations understanding of the specification and the terminology, structures, and special cases that go along with it. To use an analogy, to randomly jump to "AutospaceLikeWord95" is the equivalent of a first-year law student critiquing complex legal contracts without understanding the framework of contract law. Contracts, even complex ones, do not fully define and cite all legal authorities from which the clauses derive its legal standings.
Sure you can argue that an engineering specification should be written like a law, but consider the fact that the ISO Office OpenXML file format spec is over 6000 pages long. There are bound to be areas where quality gaps remain. In this case, consider the fact this particular class exists. It means that even Microsoft didn't properly document Word95 so that it could be re-implemented in a future spec. The guy who probably wrote the actual spec is long gone and it is left to a junior program manager straight out of college to decipher the re-implementation and new documentation around it. There is a reason why document fidelity between Office 97 and Office 2003 was good, because it had better documentation and planning. Pre-Office 97 formats were engineered for another era when competition was high and deadlines were more important than perfect documentation.
Really? Pretty sure you're trolling.. because this is not really an explanation:
This algorithm typically results in the following:
An increase in the inter-character spacing added between non-ideographic and/or number characters and certain full-width characters
No inter-character spacing between non-ideographic and/or number characters and certain half-width characters
*Typically* results? *Increase* in character spacing? how much increase? *Certain* full/half width characters? Which ones?
if you read entire link, you'd see the part where it says,
"Characters in the following Unicode ranges should be treated as ideographic, even though those characters are full-width forms of non-ideographic text: U+FF10–U+FF19, U+FF21–U+FF3A, and U+FF41–U+FF5A. [Note: This results in the unnecessary addition of space. end note]
Characters in the following Unicode ranges should be treated as non-ideographic, even though those characters are ideographic: U+FF66–U+FF9F. [Note: This results in the omission of the intended additional space. end note]"
The standard of use for MS office is Libreoffice, then it is obvious that the government will save on licensing costs, however those who use MS office in an enterprise environment as large as the government do not use Office simply as a suite of applications. Office is a software platform that connects with many line of non-MS business systems. Think plugins and addons on steroids. The engineering effort by vendors, in house IT, and analysts to convert all these things would be hugely disruptive.
Sure it fine to introduce choice for less sophisticated offices, but to mandate LibreOffice or any other product, commercial or otherwise is bad procurement practice. Licensing is chump change relative to the larger personnel & ecosystem costs.
Actually there is no such thing as preemptive pardons. Yes even presidential authority must be defined in law. What Ford did was neither legal nor illegal. If you read how pardoning powers work, a person must be charged with a crime before being pardoned from it. To this date, Nixon has never been charged with any crime. What Ford did was short-circuit the legal process.
The promise a console is that games will be playable and fun throughout the life of the console. Microsoft and Sony have indicated that they are shooting for a decade, if I'm not mistaken. Whether you believe this or not is left to individuals decide. Looking back at my ownership experience with xbox360, I believe game quality will get better over time versus PC gaming, and that I'll have better social & gaming moments from a dedicated console.
Sure, I will have a PC to game on, but it will unlikely be my primary device because I'm an adult now and my PC is for serious tech work. I don't have time to deal with all the shitty DRM and rootkit issues of the future. Nor am I interested in dealing with poorly optimized games, I just don't have the time I had 10 years ago.
I agree with this. Hyper-V on windows 8.1 is the way to go for dev environment if you need desktop class OS. If you can get a dev license for Windows Server 2008 or 2012, it will be fine also and help you later on in the configuration management as you approach production level code.
Either way you should absolutely virtualize and learn how to use Fixed Differencing VMs (base workstation host + base virtual machine + differenced VM). Once you get a baseline virtual machine set up, you make it read-only and have all future modifications go to the differenced VM. This way if you ever need to start over or spin up a duplicate environment using different configuration, you can start a new differenced image or just delete the existing diff image.
Agreed if the police want phone history just get a warrant for records from the cellular service provider, Skype, viber whoever.
The modern day smartphone should be treated like a safe, which requires a warrant to open. I believe the standard is that if there is a general expectation if privacy then you need a warrant. What is the difference between searching a smartphone or vehicle? Legally I see no difference.
I never said that my reason was THE reason JPM chose to extend XP Embedded. I simply one possible viewpoint to consider. I posed the question and people are going off on the thread as if I'm loading the question, I'm not. I agree with you that JPM's decision to extend is more about any change rather than upgrade cycles.
"In many cases, the cost of contesting a patent, searching for prior art and the recruitment of lawyers, is prohibitive and a distraction, so a settlement is made without recourse to the law and the validity of the patent is never contested.
Owning your own patents as a bargaining chip is no defence against a troll. Far from encouraging openness and the spread of ideas, the cumulative effect of the patent industry is to stifle innovation â" and to limit technological exploration to those who can afford a roomful of lawyers."
Fair enough. I never said there was a problem. All I was responding to was Icebike's comment where he made it sound like JPM were idiots for not choosing Linux and that somehow by choosing Linux, it's automatically more secure that an embedded Windows OS.
So true. I just got modded down from +3 interesting to troll for posing the legal QUESTION of patents and indemnity for Linux in a the previous JP Morgan ATM thread. The stupidest comments got modded up.
As far as I can see all you've written are comments calling me a liar and negating every factual argument I've made in this thread with essentially, "you don't know what you're talking about" type response that borderlines flamebait. You think I'm spreading FUD. Any rational reading of record will show I'm right. I'm personally against software patents but that doesn't mean that today commercial Linux users arent at risk for legal claims.
Linux can be free as in beer for some users, but for many commercials users, Linux is not free, and at best is free as in puppies.
I'll take the word of a respected physicist over some commenter on slashdot when it comes to coal fly ash. Hell, for you, I'll even take the word of Wikipedia over yours as a sign of how little I respect your contribution in this discussion thread. You're an asshole.
No because it's not FUD. Large scale Commerical Linux users do open themselves up to lawsuits and legal fees in patent lawsuits. It's plain and simple. I'm not saying it's right, or Linux sucks, or arguing the technical merits. For customers like JPM, using Linux is appropriate for somethings but using it for a ATM network is not an automatic slam dunk as Icebike seems to imply. Anyone who supports Linux commercially knows this. Customers such as banks do assess risks on non-technical factors when examining technology choices.
And "Dismissed with prejudice" is simply a legal procedure, not what you think it means. It just means that the plantiff cannot bring this matter against the defendant before the courts again.
You must be an idiot. Vacated doesn't mean that that no violation existed. It means that the court no longer needs to decide. It's a freaking settlement with undisclosed terms with paying its owns attorney fees on top of that. All if which basically supports what I have been saying. The biggest Commercial users of Linux can be targeted by patent holders and successfully extract damages either through litigation or settlements.
That was paraphrasing for Secretary of Energy Dr. Chu. Though I should correct the record and say that i mistakenly said nuclear waste instead of nuclear power plants. All in all fly ash is still horrible and a serious health hazard.
Slashdot Mirror
When Word 95 came out there were many people still using WordPerfect in business environments. In fact even today there are legacy record systems that still require WordPerfect format for archiving purposes. Like many people today, people were not just jumping to the latest and greatest OS and office suite. Businesses would require many more years before they left DOS and OS/2 at the time.
The ribbon is crap for the majority of users, especially if you have a small screen. When writing docs, most of the time should be spent on writing content, not formatting. The old style menu system reflects this. With the ribbon 95% of the time it's a waste of space which takes away from actual useful space for text editing.
Power users (like you I'd assume) might have a point, but 99% of MS Office users are not power users, and essentially use it as a typewriter with spell check.
so just double-click on any of the ribbon tabs to hide the entire ribbon.
Yes and no. Even between Office 2007 and 2010, documents don't always look the same... we have run into this for pretty simple documents. I have no idea why it's so ridiculously complicated that even the software provider can't get it right, but I'm guessing it has more to do with trying to intentionally hurt interoperability than anything else.
Call me a cynic, but I've been around for a very very long time and I've seen a lot of poor sportsmanship in the Microsoft camp.
The funny thing is now we're intentionally using older versions of MS Office simply because everyone hasn't learned the 2007 version yet, so what's the use of overloading everyone by going to the newest version every 2-3 years? The couple of users who will benefit can have the upgrade. The rest can have an upgrade every x versions.
if the document was generated or originated using pre-Office 97 formats, and were converted to Office 97-2003 formats, then there is still a chance that Office 2007 or Office 2010 can render differently. I would like to see an example where a native 2007 file looks different when opened in 2010. Yes, such examples exist, but I've only seen evidence of this produced by Microsoft in public disclosure to showcase a hypothetical. In practice 2007 and 2010 are effectively the same, with 2007 being pre-ISO OpenXML, and 2010 being ISO OpenXML.
Its not something that a typical developer can just decide to do on a weekend. To take an honest stab requires a foundations understanding of the specification and the terminology, structures, and special cases that go along with it. To use an analogy, to randomly jump to "AutospaceLikeWord95" is the equivalent of a first-year law student critiquing complex legal contracts without understanding the framework of contract law. Contracts, even complex ones, do not fully define and cite all legal authorities from which the clauses derive its legal standings.
Sure you can argue that an engineering specification should be written like a law, but consider the fact that the ISO Office OpenXML file format spec is over 6000 pages long. There are bound to be areas where quality gaps remain. In this case, consider the fact this particular class exists. It means that even Microsoft didn't properly document Word95 so that it could be re-implemented in a future spec. The guy who probably wrote the actual spec is long gone and it is left to a junior program manager straight out of college to decipher the re-implementation and new documentation around it. There is a reason why document fidelity between Office 97 and Office 2003 was good, because it had better documentation and planning. Pre-Office 97 formats were engineered for another era when competition was high and deadlines were more important than perfect documentation.
Really? Pretty sure you're trolling.. because this is not really an explanation:
This algorithm typically results in the following:
An increase in the inter-character spacing added between non-ideographic and/or number characters and certain full-width characters
No inter-character spacing between non-ideographic and/or number characters and certain half-width characters
*Typically* results?
*Increase* in character spacing? how much increase?
*Certain* full/half width characters? Which ones?
if you read entire link, you'd see the part where it says,
"Characters in the following Unicode ranges should be treated as ideographic, even though those characters are full-width forms of non-ideographic text: U+FF10–U+FF19, U+FF21–U+FF3A, and U+FF41–U+FF5A. [Note: This results in the unnecessary addition of space. end note]
Characters in the following Unicode ranges should be treated as non-ideographic, even though those characters are ideographic: U+FF66–U+FF9F. [Note: This results in the omission of the intended additional space. end note]"
Apologies for the shit grammar, typed this on my phone while on a train.
*disclaimer: former Msft office guy here*
The standard of use for MS office is Libreoffice, then it is obvious that the government will save on licensing costs, however those who use MS office in an enterprise environment as large as the government do not use Office simply as a suite of applications. Office is a software platform that connects with many line of non-MS business systems. Think plugins and addons on steroids. The engineering effort by vendors, in house IT, and analysts to convert all these things would be hugely disruptive.
Sure it fine to introduce choice for less sophisticated offices, but to mandate LibreOffice or any other product, commercial or otherwise is bad procurement practice. Licensing is chump change relative to the larger personnel & ecosystem costs.
Actually there is no such thing as preemptive pardons. Yes even presidential authority must be defined in law. What Ford did was neither legal nor illegal. If you read how pardoning powers work, a person must be charged with a crime before being pardoned from it. To this date, Nixon has never been charged with any crime. What Ford did was short-circuit the legal process.
The promise a console is that games will be playable and fun throughout the life of the console. Microsoft and Sony have indicated that they are shooting for a decade, if I'm not mistaken. Whether you believe this or not is left to individuals decide. Looking back at my ownership experience with xbox360, I believe game quality will get better over time versus PC gaming, and that I'll have better social & gaming moments from a dedicated console.
Sure, I will have a PC to game on, but it will unlikely be my primary device because I'm an adult now and my PC is for serious tech work. I don't have time to deal with all the shitty DRM and rootkit issues of the future. Nor am I interested in dealing with poorly optimized games, I just don't have the time I had 10 years ago.
Don't use virtualbox if you have to option to use Hyper-V. VM management will be much easier and will debugging any issues.
I'm not sure that this is true. In the default installation the services are configured to run. I could be mistaken though.
Either way don't install IIS or SQL Server on the host OS, install only on the virtual machine.
I agree with this. Hyper-V on windows 8.1 is the way to go for dev environment if you need desktop class OS. If you can get a dev license for Windows Server 2008 or 2012, it will be fine also and help you later on in the configuration management as you approach production level code.
Either way you should absolutely virtualize and learn how to use Fixed Differencing VMs (base workstation host + base virtual machine + differenced VM). Once you get a baseline virtual machine set up, you make it read-only and have all future modifications go to the differenced VM. This way if you ever need to start over or spin up a duplicate environment using different configuration, you can start a new differenced image or just delete the existing diff image.
Agreed if the police want phone history just get a warrant for records from the cellular service provider, Skype, viber whoever.
The modern day smartphone should be treated like a safe, which requires a warrant to open. I believe the standard is that if there is a general expectation if privacy then you need a warrant. What is the difference between searching a smartphone or vehicle? Legally I see no difference.
I never said that my reason was THE reason JPM chose to extend XP Embedded. I simply one possible viewpoint to consider. I posed the question and people are going off on the thread as if I'm loading the question, I'm not. I agree with you that JPM's decision to extend is more about any change rather than upgrade cycles.
As far as the FUD viewpoint I'll quote This post that sums up what I'm getting at: http://www.linuxuser.co.uk/features/the-litigation-business-the-free-software-column
"In many cases, the cost of contesting a patent, searching for prior art and the recruitment of lawyers, is prohibitive and a distraction, so a settlement is made without recourse to the law and the validity of the patent is never contested.
Owning your own patents as a bargaining chip is no defence against a troll. Far from encouraging openness and the spread of ideas, the cumulative effect of the patent industry is to stifle innovation â" and to limit technological exploration to those who can afford a roomful of lawyers."
Fair enough. I never said there was a problem. All I was responding to was Icebike's comment where he made it sound like JPM were idiots for not choosing Linux and that somehow by choosing Linux, it's automatically more secure that an embedded Windows OS.
How the hell did your comment get modded troll?
So true. I just got modded down from +3 interesting to troll for posing the legal QUESTION of patents and indemnity for Linux in a the previous JP Morgan ATM thread. The stupidest comments got modded up.
Btw it's not really a major backtrack, that comment was made ages ago and was corrected after the fact. See page two. Bottom line Nuclear > Coal.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste&page=2
As far as I can see all you've written are comments calling me a liar and negating every factual argument I've made in this thread with essentially, "you don't know what you're talking about" type response that borderlines flamebait. You think I'm spreading FUD. Any rational reading of record will show I'm right. I'm personally against software patents but that doesn't mean that today commercial Linux users arent at risk for legal claims.
Linux can be free as in beer for some users, but for many commercials users, Linux is not free, and at best is free as in puppies.
I'll take the word of a respected physicist over some commenter on slashdot when it comes to coal fly ash. Hell, for you, I'll even take the word of Wikipedia over yours as a sign of how little I respect your contribution in this discussion thread. You're an asshole.
No because it's not FUD. Large scale Commerical Linux users do open themselves up to lawsuits and legal fees in patent lawsuits. It's plain and simple. I'm not saying it's right, or Linux sucks, or arguing the technical merits. For customers like JPM, using Linux is appropriate for somethings but using it for a ATM network is not an automatic slam dunk as Icebike seems to imply. Anyone who supports Linux commercially knows this. Customers such as banks do assess risks on non-technical factors when examining technology choices.
And "Dismissed with prejudice" is simply a legal procedure, not what you think it means. It just means that the plantiff cannot bring this matter against the defendant before the courts again.
You must be an idiot. Vacated doesn't mean that that no violation existed. It means that the court no longer needs to decide. It's a freaking settlement with undisclosed terms with paying its owns attorney fees on top of that. All if which basically supports what I have been saying. The biggest Commercial users of Linux can be targeted by patent holders and successfully extract damages either through litigation or settlements.
That was paraphrasing for Secretary of Energy Dr. Chu. Though I should correct the record and say that i mistakenly said nuclear waste instead of nuclear power plants. All in all fly ash is still horrible and a serious health hazard.
http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/whoatms-who-on-obamaatms-green-team-stephen-chu-secretary-of-energy.html
While I respect your zeal, it is your sheer ignorance of the issues have me at awe. Oh and US Justice System disagrees with you too.
http://m.networkworld.com/news/2011/042111-google-linux-patent-infringement.html?mm_ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F#mobify-bookmark