Have you considered mailing every bank that requires IE and/or fails to support Firefox that you have decided not to become their client due to IE lock-in?
Send enough mails and you may see some improvement; the management is probably unaware that this may be an issue.
I'd like to see you have the nerve and belligerence to walk up to any of these people and say: "you're using IE so therefore you are wrong and stupid", when they are not actually at fault.
Putting aside the fact that I had been aiming for a Funny moderation instead of Insightful, this is one fine leap of logic you're suggesting, and some finely chosen words you're putting in my mouth.
While I did describe mere usage of IE as wrong and stupid, it would not do to assume I said IE users were wrong and stupid.
So please, suppress your righteous indignation.
Oh, BTW:
1. 30 - 50 year old couple with no technically competent friends or family (or kids) using a computer from Dell or a corner store. This is actually a pretty large fraction of 'Net users out there, and they use IE and windows through no fault of their own.
I should consider every usage of any device without proper level of competence wrong and stupid.
Just because people do not get injured or killed during untrained computer use doesn't mean that untrained use isn't irresponsible.
2. Scientists and Researchers having to use Active X only data repository sites because they need to get aerial maps from a government site etc...
Defective by design == wrong and stupid in my book.
3. Office workers being forced into using IE due to corporate compliance.
See above.
Furthermore, if shit happens because users adhere to corporate policies, then any damage caused to their workstations is not their fault, but the policy's. And in that case, the policy is wrong and stupid, so I pass Go and collect my $200.
Which OOXML most certainly isn't. There's real doubts that even Microsoft could implement it as it currently stands.
It's a scam, pure and simple.
So what do we do?
That's right: whenever you receive a.docx,.xlsx and other.*x documents, send them back, asking that they be converted into a readable format.
Include a link for Sun's ODF plugin for MS Office, if need be.
Though when you go to absolutely legitimate site (that has been infected just last night) with IE and through many of its holes you now got a trojan installed on your machine, how is that a user's fault? Apart from using IE this user did absolutely nothing wrong or stupid.
I should say that using IE is wrong and stupid enough.
I remember buying MathType in 1997 or so because I found it in Word. I was grateful as I wouldn't have known about MathType otherwise (then).
I guess my point is that it was helpful (for both me and the third party) since it led me to find a program I used a lot from a small 3rd party.
It is no less adware just because the ads may be useful.
I hated having to find programs ($20 or $30 for something I needed to use once so I didn't do it) though that did what Office should have been able to do (I really can't remember what now but I remember being really angry because they were simple things).
And these ads, if they are indeed useful and not annoying (and remember, all ads in any kind of adware are useful to somebody; if nobody ever clicked them, they wouldn't exist in the first place or would die out soon), only make it easier to find that kind of functionality elsewhere, for if it were built in into Office, there would be no need for the ads.
myself, but what if you shipped your laptop to and from wherever you were going by
FedEx or whatever?
They still open the package in the customs and charge you heavily just for opening it. And they can do whatever they want to with it while it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it.
Therefore, many layers of TrueCrypt, fake data, semi-real data, and what-not else...
What does TSA stand for, anyway? Techno Stasi of America?
Luckily, KDE's Kickoff menu is lightyears ahead of Vista's Start menu, and Linux UIs in general are of pretty high quality.
programs with really absurd/dorky names that make no sense to anyone but nerds who get the inside joke (if there even is one),
Actually, they don't care much about names either way. As long as they can make the program do what they want it to with as little hassle as possible, they couldn't care less about its name.
Besides, KDE, for one, shows a short description of the program right in the menu, so you don't even have to memorize it.
and O/S's that don't support their favorite software.
Actually, it's the other way round: application vendors do not support certain operating systems.
There is little Linux people could do to support Photoshop, except create an emulation layer or something like that...
I'm truly fascinated with the way things are reversed in the computer world, and how natural it seems to most people... operating system developers should support applications, web designers should support browser rendering bugs... Get a grip on reality, will you, people?
Honestly, I'd say it's about 100x's more likely that OSX gains significant ground to the point where it makes sense for apple to source out OSX to third party system builders than it would that Linux gains any significant headground. You know, unless the Linux community understands and finally makes strides to make Linux a) look like a program you would actually go out and spend your hard earned money on and b) make the UI and naming convention on the included software logical.
I, for one, find a bit more logic in the Dapper Drake --> Edgy Eft --> Feisty Fawn progression then in the Panther --> Tiger --> Leopard one.
I'd even go so far to say that Windows seems to have the most inane naming policy, yet it still dominates the market.
Not that I find that naming really matters. At all.
As far as the way Linux looks — have you seen Compiz Fusion?
Do you know how many people not only considered, but actually started using Linux based on the Compiz bling factor alone?
And get this: you don't even have to spend your hard-earned money on it.
I can get you a pirate version really cheap.;)
120,000 years? Is Dick Cheney that old? I think you need to dial down the paranoia a bit. Government hasn't been around that long - you're talking about times before metal was known.
So what? They were bashing their heads in with rocks, then.
No, you see, we have these new designations called area codes -- or NPA in telco speak. You are off by about 3 orders of magnitude in your calculations.
But hey, 8 billion or so iterations of a simple script is nothing. Now there's just that issue of paying a few dollars per submission. d0h!
As I recall, under long-standing International treaty and law, a nation has the right to control anything and everything that passes its borders. In pre cybernetic days, this meant that all documents could be searched, reviewed, etc. Historically this has been an excellent intelligence gathering activity. Oh yes, and this includes mail, packages, as well as the baggage of persons crossing the borders.
Searching and reviewing != copying and archiving.
Let me just say, I live in a former "communist country". And this sounds exactly like the bad old days my grandparents sometimes talk about.
The way I see it, you guys are being screwed. Slowly, but oh so absolutely.
I know I won't be coming your way any time soon.
The so-called communist regimes have fallen. Not that we're having it any better now, but still... changes happen.
The question is, when will Americans decide to change something... and in their own country, for a change.
The more I observe the world, the more I loathe democracy.
It may work nicely on a local level, but when you get any higher than that, too many layers of abstraction shield the officials from their voters. And so the parties turn into clans, clans into dynasties — the main thing against which the revolutions that led to democracy were started in the first place.
All it does is make people feel responsible. Or dejected.
It reminds me of the famous experiment on two monkeys that received electric shocks; one had a button in front of him, and if he pressed it in the right moment, neither would be shocked; if not, both would be shocked. Of course, he wasn't getting any indication of when to press the button. The first monkey grew extremely agitated; the second one learned to accept his fate, as he had had no way to change it anyway.
Apply this to the way democracy works: a whole bunch of people realizes that their vote really changes nothing (beside the fact that it's rather silly to have millions electing a handful, thus picking the lowest common denominator) so they abstain from the democratic process. Which depends on their cooperation.
Giving people an illusion that they can actually change things only makes them unhappier.
And in the olden days, when enough people grew discontent with the current government, they could organize and change it in a nice little revolution. When the government nobody really likes is elected by the people, the people are less prone to start a revolution. Therefore, democracy exists only to protect the government, not the people.
Anyway, now that you can see how much they are afraid of you — what are you planning to do?
So then what your argument is saying is essentially "If you're so stupid that you would do X, then how can you not do Y, which is not nearly as stupid."
Actually, it says "if you're so stupid that you would do X, then how can you consider Y stupid, since it is not nearly as stupid?"
Anyway, I usually rant about a very similar phenomenon: people willing to spend $2000 on a computer, but then picking up the cheapest keyboard and mouse available.
I, on the other hand, don't have a beast of a computer, but I have a decent monitor, a Unicomp SpaceSaver keyboard (basically a slimmed down Model M) and an MX Revolution mouse. I love my arms and eyes dearly and I hope to keep them in working order for a while longer; not like my mother, who got RSI several weeks ago (and after spending half an hour at her desk, I am only surprised it took her that long).
People are often concerned with "big things", even to the point of neglecting "little things"...
Now, the only problem is that not enough people are aware of the viable alternatives.
Well, that and the fact that quite a number of things revolve around Excel. And in such a way that they cannot readily be picked up with OO.o.
With all that said, most businesses don't even need the capabilities of OO.o, let alone MS Office... but MS Office has mindshare.
Hey, I just got an idea... we need howtos and tutorials.
You can get tutorials on how to do stuff with MS Office in a zillion places. Detailed tutorials about how to do stuff — from most basic stuff to complex tasks — in OO.o are not that common.
Build the howtos and tutorials, and thus lower the wall for newbies.
* I use Pidgin everywhere now, but long ago, my Mac wound up with MSN and Yahoo Messenger on it due to social and work demands... and GAIM wasn't IMHO a viable option there.
My point isn't to try to make Micro$oft look better, it's to point out the hypocrisy of IBM trying to make Micro$oft look like "the bad guys" when IBM are exactly the same. If IBM sold its services division tomorrow. You'd never hear 'open source' from IBM again. It's entirely related, as has been my point all along, to their own self interests in generating services revenue.
As I've said before, whatever their reasons, if they support something I believe to be good, then I'm going to like them supporting it.
Should they do a 180 degree turn, so shall my views.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you considered mailing every bank that requires IE and/or fails to support Firefox that you have decided not to become their client due to IE lock-in?
Send enough mails and you may see some improvement; the management is probably unaware that this may be an issue.
Putting aside the fact that I had been aiming for a Funny moderation instead of Insightful, this is one fine leap of logic you're suggesting, and some finely chosen words you're putting in my mouth.
While I did describe mere usage of IE as wrong and stupid, it would not do to assume I said IE users were wrong and stupid.
Oh, BTW: 1. 30 - 50 year old couple with no technically competent friends or family (or kids) using a computer from Dell or a corner store. This is actually a pretty large fraction of 'Net users out there, and they use IE and windows through no fault of their own.So please, suppress your righteous indignation.
I should consider every usage of any device without proper level of competence wrong and stupid.
2. Scientists and Researchers having to use Active X only data repository sites because they need to get aerial maps from a government site etc...Just because people do not get injured or killed during untrained computer use doesn't mean that untrained use isn't irresponsible.
Defective by design == wrong and stupid in my book.
3. Office workers being forced into using IE due to corporate compliance.See above.
Furthermore, if shit happens because users adhere to corporate policies, then any damage caused to their workstations is not their fault, but the policy's. And in that case, the policy is wrong and stupid, so I pass Go and collect my $200.
It's a scam, pure and simple.
So what do we do?
That's right: whenever you receive a .docx, .xlsx and other .*x documents, send them back, asking that they be converted into a readable format.
Include a link for Sun's ODF plugin for MS Office, if need be.
Fight fire with fire.
I should say that using IE is wrong and stupid enough.
That is a bit annoying, but you can pick any of the parent folders at the top of that window, so it's not that big a deal.
I guess my point is that it was helpful (for both me and the third party) since it led me to find a program I used a lot from a small 3rd party.
It is no less adware just because the ads may be useful.
I hated having to find programs ($20 or $30 for something I needed to use once so I didn't do it) though that did what Office should have been able to do (I really can't remember what now but I remember being really angry because they were simple things).And these ads, if they are indeed useful and not annoying (and remember, all ads in any kind of adware are useful to somebody; if nobody ever clicked them, they wouldn't exist in the first place or would die out soon), only make it easier to find that kind of functionality elsewhere, for if it were built in into Office, there would be no need for the ads.
If it has to go through customs, it is subject to inspection just like anything else that's going through customs.
FedEx or whatever?
They still open the package in the customs and charge you heavily just for opening it. And they can do whatever they want to with it while it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it.
Therefore, many layers of TrueCrypt, fake data, semi-real data, and what-not else...
What does TSA stand for, anyway? Techno Stasi of America?
Luckily, KDE's Kickoff menu is lightyears ahead of Vista's Start menu, and Linux UIs in general are of pretty high quality.
programs with really absurd/dorky names that make no sense to anyone but nerds who get the inside joke (if there even is one),Actually, they don't care much about names either way. As long as they can make the program do what they want it to with as little hassle as possible, they couldn't care less about its name.
and O/S's that don't support their favorite software.Besides, KDE, for one, shows a short description of the program right in the menu, so you don't even have to memorize it.
Actually, it's the other way round: application vendors do not support certain operating systems.
There is little Linux people could do to support Photoshop, except create an emulation layer or something like that...
I'm truly fascinated with the way things are reversed in the computer world, and how natural it seems to most people... operating system developers should support applications, web designers should support browser rendering bugs... Get a grip on reality, will you, people?
Honestly, I'd say it's about 100x's more likely that OSX gains significant ground to the point where it makes sense for apple to source out OSX to third party system builders than it would that Linux gains any significant headground. You know, unless the Linux community understands and finally makes strides to make Linux a) look like a program you would actually go out and spend your hard earned money on and b) make the UI and naming convention on the included software logical.I, for one, find a bit more logic in the Dapper Drake --> Edgy Eft --> Feisty Fawn progression then in the Panther --> Tiger --> Leopard one.
I'd even go so far to say that Windows seems to have the most inane naming policy, yet it still dominates the market.
Not that I find that naming really matters. At all.
As far as the way Linux looks — have you seen Compiz Fusion?
Do you know how many people not only considered, but actually started using Linux based on the Compiz bling factor alone?
And get this: you don't even have to spend your hard-earned money on it. ;)
I can get you a pirate version really cheap.
Might prove to be a long wait, if you just keep waiting.
So what? They were bashing their heads in with rocks, then.
Funny, that. I've heard LISPers say "XML looks quite like LISP, only uglier."
But hey, 8 billion or so iterations of a simple script is nothing. Now there's just that issue of paying a few dollars per submission. d0h!
Charge it to Bill Gates.
For the first time in my life I actually understand what answering machines are really for.
In my country, practically no-one uses them, and if anybody has one, most people just hang up when it answers the call anyway.
On the other hand, spam calls aren't nearly as prevalent here...
Searching and reviewing != copying and archiving.
Let me just say, I live in a former "communist country". And this sounds exactly like the bad old days my grandparents sometimes talk about.
The way I see it, you guys are being screwed. Slowly, but oh so absolutely.
I know I won't be coming your way any time soon.
Boiling a frog, indeed.
The so-called communist regimes have fallen. Not that we're having it any better now, but still... changes happen.
The question is, when will Americans decide to change something... and in their own country, for a change.
The more I observe the world, the more I loathe democracy.
It may work nicely on a local level, but when you get any higher than that, too many layers of abstraction shield the officials from their voters. And so the parties turn into clans, clans into dynasties — the main thing against which the revolutions that led to democracy were started in the first place.
All it does is make people feel responsible. Or dejected.
It reminds me of the famous experiment on two monkeys that received electric shocks; one had a button in front of him, and if he pressed it in the right moment, neither would be shocked; if not, both would be shocked. Of course, he wasn't getting any indication of when to press the button. The first monkey grew extremely agitated; the second one learned to accept his fate, as he had had no way to change it anyway.
Apply this to the way democracy works: a whole bunch of people realizes that their vote really changes nothing (beside the fact that it's rather silly to have millions electing a handful, thus picking the lowest common denominator) so they abstain from the democratic process. Which depends on their cooperation.
Giving people an illusion that they can actually change things only makes them unhappier.
And in the olden days, when enough people grew discontent with the current government, they could organize and change it in a nice little revolution. When the government nobody really likes is elected by the people, the people are less prone to start a revolution. Therefore, democracy exists only to protect the government, not the people.
Anyway, now that you can see how much they are afraid of you — what are you planning to do?
I should hope that the developers provided him with some.
I mean, he had to do something while waiting for them to finish...
The shelves? Bah.
They could be on the shelves on April 1, for all that I know.
No. I'll believe it when I see it.
In my computer, installed, running, kicking ass and chewing bubble gum.
BTW, d'you think it'll run on Linux?
So then what your argument is saying is essentially "If you're so stupid that you would do X, then how can you not do Y, which is not nearly as stupid."
Actually, it says "if you're so stupid that you would do X, then how can you consider Y stupid, since it is not nearly as stupid?"
Anyway, I usually rant about a very similar phenomenon: people willing to spend $2000 on a computer, but then picking up the cheapest keyboard and mouse available.
I, on the other hand, don't have a beast of a computer, but I have a decent monitor, a Unicomp SpaceSaver keyboard (basically a slimmed down Model M) and an MX Revolution mouse. I love my arms and eyes dearly and I hope to keep them in working order for a while longer; not like my mother, who got RSI several weeks ago (and after spending half an hour at her desk, I am only surprised it took her that long).
People are often concerned with "big things", even to the point of neglecting "little things"...
Now, the only problem is that not enough people are aware of the viable alternatives.
Well, that and the fact that quite a number of things revolve around Excel. And in such a way that they cannot readily be picked up with OO.o.
With all that said, most businesses don't even need the capabilities of OO.o, let alone MS Office... but MS Office has mindshare.
Hey, I just got an idea... we need howtos and tutorials.
You can get tutorials on how to do stuff with MS Office in a zillion places. Detailed tutorials about how to do stuff — from most basic stuff to complex tasks — in OO.o are not that common.
Build the howtos and tutorials, and thus lower the wall for newbies.
You should consider Adium, then.
Unless you need custom smilies and webcam support.
A friend of my friend...
As I've said before, whatever their reasons, if they support something I believe to be good, then I'm going to like them supporting it.
Should they do a 180 degree turn, so shall my views.
s/thinks/claims
Who, it was later reported, died in a prison camp. Great analogy...
He may have died, but you could still argue he had won.
To make an analogy with software, it's like a revolutionary piece of software no-one ever uses or supports today.