Okay, tell me where in the OSS world is there a net service-based, collaboritive office suite? Where in any software world? If you've followed.NET at all (as opposed to just bashing Microsoft), you'd see this was the direction they've been planning to take since 2000..NET is an entirely net-capable assembly delivery service. Microsoft wants it to be the foundation for all web apps.
Even OSS has gotten in on the game with Mono. How's that for innovating what's already out there? Lame, indeed.
Integrating the Internet into the desktop is the most logical step. Even KDE integrated Konquerer into the experience. I know we must blindly dismiss and hate everything Microsoft does in order to post here, but this is actually the right thing to do for Office.
Yes, there is a file called Office Startup Assistant that precaches things like fonts and shared libraries. It has to be placed in the Startup folder, often done during Office Setup. In older versions of Office, you could turn this off so it didn't do it, but Office doesn't even install it by default anymore.
The Office Startup Assistant (Osa.exe or OSA) is a program that improves the performance of Office 2003 programs. Office Setup no longer puts a shortcut to the Osa.exe file in the Windows Startup folder as do the earlier versions of Microsoft Office.
I haven't seen Office Startup Assistant in the Startup folder since using Office 97 in college.
And the fact that Office apps are mostly loaded into memory at boot, thus providing the illusion of speed when they're 'opened', hasn't been pointed out to you?
And the fact that that's not true hasn't been pointed out to you? Yet, I fully expect to see ignorant people repeat this false idea again in the next Windows discussion.
I'd prefer not to have apps load on boot unless I tell them to load on boot, thank you very much. I don't need either my RAM or swap being soaked by an app I haven't given explicit permission to load.
Good thing Office doesn't do this. It's a false rumor that it's loaded on boot. Nobody seems to care that's it not true.
Microsoft Office isn't preloaded into memory on bootup. This is yet another false Slashdot meme that gets regurgitated over and over until it becomes "fact." At most, all Office ever did was automatically run a quicklaunch bar at the top of the screen. I don't even see that around anymore.
First of all, it's OSTG. Name change happened about three weeks ago.
I'm aware of that. Most people know the company as OSDN. I'll eventually update the sig.
Slashdot is not a news site, it is a blog
"News for nerds. Stuff that matters." Slashdot doesn't post michael's daily life journals or roblimo's latest thoughts on marriage. It posts tech news submissions from readers (often without proofreading or actually reading what they link to).
The people who have editorial control over these sites are highly professional and are constantly guarding the integrity of each OSTG site.
Highly professional? This site is infamous for completely ignoring the suggestions and ideas of subscribers. Often, reposts, major typos, and false articles are posted despite subscribers letting the editor know about their mistakes before the story hits the front page. Worse yet, editors like michael have been known to quietly modbomb entire threads that are critical of them or something they posted.
Little of our work is specifically anti-Microsoft.
There are more Microsoft articles posted every day than anything involving OSS or OSS projects (like Linux). Most of the other topics are under the mysteriously broad "IT" topic or involve software patents or SCO. There were about three SP2 articles posted within two days. The majority of Microsoft articles are completely anti-Microsoft. Often, most of the resulting comments will be criticisms of the bias of the submission. I doubt the editors read comments very much these days, because sentiment has changed. People have even complained about the juvenile cracked window icon for Windows stories. In Slashdot's haste to bash Microsoft at every opportunity, they even reposted the "Microsoft pays for translation mistakes" article while it was still on the front page. It was subsequently removed, but plenty of people saw it and laughed.
But it's easier to just pass us all off as a bunch of unprofessional hacks who enjoy manipulating innocent readers into believing our sick and twisted agenda. Because you believe everything you read and can't think critically or make decisions for yourself, right? Gosh I hope so -- otherwise it's curtains for online journalists.
The majority of the community comes here for its tech news. Whether or not you choose to ignore that, it is the truth. When they post articles like "Microsoft Violates Human Rights In China," you mislead people into forming a viewpoint that is plainly biased. There is an amusing irony to the idea of a website that often posts submissions with an anti-corporate slant being owned by a company, running banner ads, and selling subscriptions. On top of that, your articles--especially Microsoft articles--are often completely inacccurate. To this day, you still get people who think WinFS has been "cancelled" from Longhorn, when it wasn't. But there was a Slashdot article posted that said it was. So everyone regurgitates the statement in enough +5 posts to become "truth."
Six minutes after I posted. That's scary. You're actually sitting there obsessively refreshing my userpage, aren't you? How funny. I have no idea who these two guys are that you're linking to and I don't know what I said to set you off, but it's cute that you're doing this for everything I post on Slashdot. I never thought I'd be the victim of a troll attack.
Look at the middle of the capital 'S'. It's wider than the rest of the stroke. It's more pronounced with other fonts in other screenshots than on that page, particularly with numbers.
If you took a look through it (or had someone else tell you about it, *cough*), you'd have noticed all the old Quake-like source files in it like glquake.h. It looked as though parts of Half-Life 1 were included. The reason became clear when people figured out you could play the original Half-Life using the Source engine as though it was a big TC. Amazingly, Valve retained mod compatibility with the previous Half-Life.
So basically, the reason nothing's changed but the graphics is because, literally, very little has changed but the graphics.
We constantly see people complaining about the patents, and Slashdot continues to post new patent filing stories. But I have yet to see anything actually happening based on these patents. It's like people think companies never filed for endless patents befoe. People, this has gone on for years and years. It's just that websites like Slashdot make a big deal of it now, but nothing actually changes or has changed.
Looking at the font rendering, I still notice bizarre ghost pixels on the edges of curved characters like capital "S" and especially numbers. I'm constantly told Linux font rendering is supposted to be better than Windows and OS X, but honestly, it's a completely false assertation. Enabling TrueType hinting does nothing. There is something weird going on when rendering those curves--anyone more technically minded know what it is?
If they come up with something totally new, they get slammed for a steep learning curve.
No, they don't. When something new and cool comes up, it's praised. That's pretty much describing the Linux kernel right there.
Reviewers go on tirades and whitepapers are written about how the TCO is too high because of the training necessary, etc.
That's a bit misleading. The TCO arguments have to do with server and network administration, not desktop Linux (i.e., KDE/GNOME).
As far as desktop reviewers, they go on tirades because often the applications are superficially easy to use, and they look familiar because of the ripped-off Microsoft interfaces, but because Linux and XFree86 are very fundamentally different under the hood, things happen that you don't expect, or you have to do things in weird ways that contradict the interface.
Keeping an interface similar allows for an easier migration of people who've been using Windows for years (office people). Thus, less training is needed and the migration costs are lower.
No, what it does is make Linux on the desktop a cheap Windows clone, but worse because it's only a superficial imitation. Too many things about Linux are different from Windows. I really don't understand why people don't attempt to come up with something new. If the creative designers of Linux came up with something intuitive and creative like OS X but with a unique interface paradigm, Linux on the desktop would have its own identity. Right now, it has about 20 conflicting identities all trying to look like a certain other big identity which most Linux users hate anyway.
Honestly, I've never seen any attempts to infuse something new, cool, and creative into desktop Linux. It's always, "Windows has a taskbar? Well, we'll have a taskbar you can move all around and add applets to and put pointless system monitors on!" "Windows has an integrated filesystem/HTML browser? We'll have one with endless sidetabs and buttons and toolbar icons!" "Windows has a start menu? We'll have a start menu with a hundred menu items with redundancies like 'System' and 'Preferences' and 'Control Panel' as well as pointless subgroups called 'More Programs'"!
Get back to me when the myriad of desktop environments actually all conform to those standards--or is this another case of linking to an unused online draft and then claiming you've topped Microsoft?
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, tell me where in the OSS world is there a net service-based, collaboritive office suite? Where in any software world? If you've followed .NET at all (as opposed to just bashing Microsoft), you'd see this was the direction they've been planning to take since 2000. .NET is an entirely net-capable assembly delivery service. Microsoft wants it to be the foundation for all web apps.
Even OSS has gotten in on the game with Mono. How's that for innovating what's already out there? Lame, indeed.
Integrating the Internet into the desktop is the most logical step. Even KDE integrated Konquerer into the experience. I know we must blindly dismiss and hate everything Microsoft does in order to post here, but this is actually the right thing to do for Office.
Yes, there is a file called Office Startup Assistant that precaches things like fonts and shared libraries. It has to be placed in the Startup folder, often done during Office Setup. In older versions of Office, you could turn this off so it didn't do it, but Office doesn't even install it by default anymore.
I suppose other jiggery-pokery is used with Office 2003.
None is used.
From the very page you link to:
The Office Startup Assistant (Osa.exe or OSA) is a program that improves the performance of Office 2003 programs. Office Setup no longer puts a shortcut to the Osa.exe file in the Windows Startup folder as do the earlier versions of Microsoft Office.
I haven't seen Office Startup Assistant in the Startup folder since using Office 97 in college.
...you got modded down for speaking against the hivemind.
X is always "moving" somewhere. Whenever someone points out the flawed designs of X, someone else mentions that they're "working on it."
What Gosling describes sounds a lot like the new Longhorn technologies, but more importantly, it sounds like what OS X already does today.
It's called Y-Windows.
And the fact that Office apps are mostly loaded into memory at boot, thus providing the illusion of speed when they're 'opened', hasn't been pointed out to you?
And the fact that that's not true hasn't been pointed out to you? Yet, I fully expect to see ignorant people repeat this false idea again in the next Windows discussion.
I'd prefer not to have apps load on boot unless I tell them to load on boot, thank you very much. I don't need either my RAM or swap being soaked by an app I haven't given explicit permission to load.
Good thing Office doesn't do this. It's a false rumor that it's loaded on boot. Nobody seems to care that's it not true.
Microsoft Office isn't preloaded into memory on bootup. This is yet another false Slashdot meme that gets regurgitated over and over until it becomes "fact." At most, all Office ever did was automatically run a quicklaunch bar at the top of the screen. I don't even see that around anymore.
First of all, it's OSTG. Name change happened about three weeks ago.
I'm aware of that. Most people know the company as OSDN. I'll eventually update the sig.
Slashdot is not a news site, it is a blog
"News for nerds. Stuff that matters." Slashdot doesn't post michael's daily life journals or roblimo's latest thoughts on marriage. It posts tech news submissions from readers (often without proofreading or actually reading what they link to).
The people who have editorial control over these sites are highly professional and are constantly guarding the integrity of each OSTG site.
Highly professional? This site is infamous for completely ignoring the suggestions and ideas of subscribers. Often, reposts, major typos, and false articles are posted despite subscribers letting the editor know about their mistakes before the story hits the front page. Worse yet, editors like michael have been known to quietly modbomb entire threads that are critical of them or something they posted.
Little of our work is specifically anti-Microsoft.
There are more Microsoft articles posted every day than anything involving OSS or OSS projects (like Linux). Most of the other topics are under the mysteriously broad "IT" topic or involve software patents or SCO. There were about three SP2 articles posted within two days. The majority of Microsoft articles are completely anti-Microsoft. Often, most of the resulting comments will be criticisms of the bias of the submission. I doubt the editors read comments very much these days, because sentiment has changed. People have even complained about the juvenile cracked window icon for Windows stories. In Slashdot's haste to bash Microsoft at every opportunity, they even reposted the "Microsoft pays for translation mistakes" article while it was still on the front page. It was subsequently removed, but plenty of people saw it and laughed.
But it's easier to just pass us all off as a bunch of unprofessional hacks who enjoy manipulating innocent readers into believing our sick and twisted agenda. Because you believe everything you read and can't think critically or make decisions for yourself, right? Gosh I hope so -- otherwise it's curtains for online journalists.
The majority of the community comes here for its tech news. Whether or not you choose to ignore that, it is the truth. When they post articles like "Microsoft Violates Human Rights In China," you mislead people into forming a viewpoint that is plainly biased. There is an amusing irony to the idea of a website that often posts submissions with an anti-corporate slant being owned by a company, running banner ads, and selling subscriptions. On top of that, your articles--especially Microsoft articles--are often completely inacccurate. To this day, you still get people who think WinFS has been "cancelled" from Longhorn, when it wasn't. But there was a Slashdot article posted that said it was. So everyone regurgitates the statement in enough +5 posts to become "truth."
Six minutes after I posted. That's scary. You're actually sitting there obsessively refreshing my userpage, aren't you? How funny. I have no idea who these two guys are that you're linking to and I don't know what I said to set you off, but it's cute that you're doing this for everything I post on Slashdot. I never thought I'd be the victim of a troll attack.
Look at the middle of the capital 'S'. It's wider than the rest of the stroke. It's more pronounced with other fonts in other screenshots than on that page, particularly with numbers.
you can't mod your own posts as far as i know, it doesnt matter if you have multiple accounts because slahsdot tracks ip numbers .. even for ACs
If you took a look through it (or had someone else tell you about it, *cough*), you'd have noticed all the old Quake-like source files in it like glquake.h. It looked as though parts of Half-Life 1 were included. The reason became clear when people figured out you could play the original Half-Life using the Source engine as though it was a big TC. Amazingly, Valve retained mod compatibility with the previous Half-Life.
So basically, the reason nothing's changed but the graphics is because, literally, very little has changed but the graphics.
I have no idea who those people are. *shrug*
We constantly see people complaining about the patents, and Slashdot continues to post new patent filing stories. But I have yet to see anything actually happening based on these patents. It's like people think companies never filed for endless patents befoe. People, this has gone on for years and years. It's just that websites like Slashdot make a big deal of it now, but nothing actually changes or has changed.
Like Microsoft, that other company going patent crazy? Oh wait, they're not going out of business.
Good point. As usual, the conclusions people draw are based entirely on the opinion they already have...
What do you think causes the north half of the arrow to point north?
http://www.akcaagac.com/desktop/pictures/kde/scree nshot03.png
Looking at the font rendering, I still notice bizarre ghost pixels on the edges of curved characters like capital "S" and especially numbers. I'm constantly told Linux font rendering is supposted to be better than Windows and OS X, but honestly, it's a completely false assertation. Enabling TrueType hinting does nothing. There is something weird going on when rendering those curves--anyone more technically minded know what it is?
If they come up with something totally new, they get slammed for a steep learning curve.
No, they don't. When something new and cool comes up, it's praised. That's pretty much describing the Linux kernel right there.
Reviewers go on tirades and whitepapers are written about how the TCO is too high because of the training necessary, etc.
That's a bit misleading. The TCO arguments have to do with server and network administration, not desktop Linux (i.e., KDE/GNOME).
As far as desktop reviewers, they go on tirades because often the applications are superficially easy to use, and they look familiar because of the ripped-off Microsoft interfaces, but because Linux and XFree86 are very fundamentally different under the hood, things happen that you don't expect, or you have to do things in weird ways that contradict the interface.
Keeping an interface similar allows for an easier migration of people who've been using Windows for years (office people). Thus, less training is needed and the migration costs are lower.
No, what it does is make Linux on the desktop a cheap Windows clone, but worse because it's only a superficial imitation. Too many things about Linux are different from Windows. I really don't understand why people don't attempt to come up with something new. If the creative designers of Linux came up with something intuitive and creative like OS X but with a unique interface paradigm, Linux on the desktop would have its own identity. Right now, it has about 20 conflicting identities all trying to look like a certain other big identity which most Linux users hate anyway.
Honestly, I've never seen any attempts to infuse something new, cool, and creative into desktop Linux. It's always, "Windows has a taskbar? Well, we'll have a taskbar you can move all around and add applets to and put pointless system monitors on!" "Windows has an integrated filesystem/HTML browser? We'll have one with endless sidetabs and buttons and toolbar icons!" "Windows has a start menu? We'll have a start menu with a hundred menu items with redundancies like 'System' and 'Preferences' and 'Control Panel' as well as pointless subgroups called 'More Programs'"!
I don't get it.
Get back to me when the myriad of desktop environments actually all conform to those standards--or is this another case of linking to an unused online draft and then claiming you've topped Microsoft?
B-but, Microsoft is bad, so this is their fault, because we must meet the daily quota of Microsoft bashing.
Quick, get him, he's breaking our hegenomy!
European news--"Is there any way we can blame this on the US?"
It's fun to generalize an entire nation's news media with no examples or logic or reasoning.