LibreOffice is just as good as Office for 90% of tasks. GIMP, on the other hand, is still a dystopian nightmare compared to Photoshop, for one main reason: separate windows for everything.
"Desktops arent workstations.. they dont need multiple users."
No they didn't. In fact I hadn't heard the term workstation for years until Microsoft Apologist are using it as an excuse for the failing desktop market (Apple Apologists use post pc). They are the same.
Android now allows multiple user spaces on shareable devices such as tablets. Each user on a device has his or her own set of accounts, apps, system settings, files, and any other user-associated data.
As an app developer, there’s nothing different you need to do in order for your app to work properly with multiple users on a single device. Regardless of how many users may exist on a device, the data your app saves for a given user is kept separate from the data your app saves for other users. The system keeps track of which user data belongs to the user process in which your app is running and provides your app access to only that user’s data and does not allow access to other users’ data."
Although you can get similar functionality from running any number of Apps/Third Party Roms:). My pet peeve is people too last to Google:).
If I want to launch the notepad, it's Start button, type 'Cal' and hit return. Boom. Why do I need a hierarchical menu to do that?
Folders suck.
If I want an editor I just type vi. Boom. Why do I even need a mouse?
I never thought I would see the day when Microsoft Apologists were advocating the GUI over the CLI, but Metro...a touch...no a Desklet interface...would finally push then to this madness.
tries to tell people like me that GIMP is just as good as PhotoShop, LibreOffice is just as good as MS Office
Sorry sweetness not sure of relevance Gimp is better than Photoshop http://www.adobe.com/products/catalog/software._sl_id-contentfilter_sl_catalog_sl_software_sl_photoshopcc.html which now costs $20 a month for its creative cloud version, Gimp is free...for me Gimp is a no brainer. I began using it as a consultant because I could install it on companies Desktop machines without License issues 15 years ago. I now run it from a pen drive.
What is frightening is both these companies(Adobe and Microsoft) are pushing me towards cloud(sic) versions of their products. Personally I these have no advantages but have a $32.50 Disadvantage...and have to use a always on-online DRM version.(ironically both should work on android in future or be avoided if they don't). think I'm the only one...Office launched on ios with a $100 a year fee for crippled version...nobody cared. its like its not happened.
This argument is nothing to do with Metro...which is shift in the Desktop interface to tablet one by Microsoft, in an poor attempt to convert its Desktop Monopoly into a Mobile one (say it with me ecosystem..cringe), and its a massive failure...they are installing it alongside Android now see what the article is about. This is nothing to do with comparing open source programs with Adobe and Microsoft equivalent those who have learnt to use them experience massive cost savings and smugness, although thanks for the Nostalgia.
I think MS has a better chance of killing android than the other way around. But why should they? They make a killing off it.
"Think" is not good enough, Android right now is the most dominant OS for both Tablet and Smartphone, Markets that Microsoft(and Apple) have been in for forever (Androids first device was in 2008). Right now the chances are your Android devices outnumber your Windows Devices...and this year Android is set to overtake windows as the Dominant OS.
Before Windows 8 (And Surface) I too may have scoffed at the idea of Microsofts Desktop Monopoly been threatened by lets face it a phone OS. Ironically now PC's come with Windows 8 a Phone OS as standard the fact that it includes a better (more popular) Phone OS and massive Application Library...and Apparently its being put on Windows devices to help sell them!? If only GNU/Linux had the same advantages.
As for your comment of Microsoft making money of Android....it makes money (in reality for windows licenses we suspect) of Windows companies now making Android devices for patents to interact with...windows using fat32 and exchange. The things stripped from stock android(into the cloud), its looking short term...and it looks like Microsoft has lost control.
If your assertion were true then Android would have supplanted Windows a long time ago, it is available on such a broad and diverse range of devices that are generally a lot cheaper than the ones Windows is on. With its malware, security, inconsistency and performance problems it is no better than Windows, the OS most people desire is OSX.
I know you like to think that people want OS X, but the fact is People are aware of OSX and are not just not buying it...they are in fact buying it less 22% last quarter 2% this, and well Windows has been dropping sales...is it 5 quarters now or 6 with more doom and gloom on the horizon...yet Ironically Android is set to eclipse Windows installation this year Yeah! For those who still care Linux has been grabbing a little market share too. high fives all around.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to post than information.
>Android, as is, has the reputation of being a resource hog
No it kind of doesn't it runs on on very basic hardware..the first phone it sold on was the HTC dream. it 528 MHz Qualcomm MSM7201A ARM11 processor, 256 MB ROM, 192 MB RAM and 320 x 480 px, 3.2 in (81 mm). Lets face it it will run well on these Windows 8 hybrid devices, Which are vastly overpowered for Android.
I was going to refute every (lie) point but this is my favourite "To have Android as a desktop OS only proves Microsoft right about many of Windows 8's design choices", and can't help but find it hilarious that your advocating turning that $600 Desktop machine into A Poor Low Resolution Tablet $100 Tablet for $160.
I reinstalled it with a friendly open Linux Distribution, I still cry in shower holding my knees tight and rocking trying to forget OS X. Fortunately they have managed to make their quality computing if overpriced computer products into glorified electronics devices, causing a drop in sales of 22% and 2%(more sane) higher than the rest of the PC market, fortunately there is devices like Pixel from Google to replace Apples offerings.
Android has basically become, like most tablets are, the modern equivalent of a thin client for the internet. And frankly, that's all a lot of users care about. It may not be the ideal of most people on/. for daily use, but I know a lot of teenage kids would be quite satisfied with that.
Ironically with Metro, and Secure boot, Microsoft Lets get in on the software Store, Windows look like a poor mobile device...with all the markup that comes with Intel and Microsoft walking home with a 70% Gross Margin. This is about helping to sell those failing to compete because of Price, by offering Android as an incentive...and its a good one, as Unlike Windows people want and Desire Android.
Gnome is aweful, they took away one of the biggest and most useful things for Desktop computing - minimizing. Until people stop kidding themselves that people don't need minimize Gnome 3's Shell will never gain true adoption.
Gnome 3 is great...Gnome Shell is awful(and some of the changes but not all to files). For Normal desktop use.
I would love a hybrid(kill for) Gnome/Android Desktop with a decent touch screen monitor(4X) on MicroITX ARM motherboard. Somewhere there is a balance between touchscreen use and desktop use, and Maybe as part of that Gnome Shell maybe better...but I doubt it.
I am tired of Company X getting out of the Desktop game(Samsung this week) chasing Apples shrinking margins, rather than reinventing the Desktop Market with something new, and Gnandroid would be my choice (or Kandroid or Xfandroid as a push).
Fact is that IE still fills a number of needs for enterprise and corporate customers.
Its not a fact. In reality any firm wanting a cutting edge advantage (as well as others) will avoid IE like a plague. The reality is targeting a platform dependant in today BYOD rather than a cutting edge browser specification, for internal...or mobile deployment is incredibly foolish.
Less like comparing brands...more like hiring a serial killer as a baby sitter.
I work for a dirt cheap client. Even we have been moving off XP for a year now.
Not pretending to be a Linux user today. I like you more as a straight Microsoft Apologist. XP exists on 220,000,000 computers. I personally love the fact that you use an Apple excuse to defend Microsoft it, shows how overpriced and under-supported Windows is.
Then perhaps they should have designed IE explorer to be cross platform:). The fact that IE does not run on Android soon to be the most dominant platform is an example of what a failure it is. The fact that is supplies its own customers with a second class experience.
Yet was not replaced for till Vista was RTM as of January 30, 2007...although XP was still the only viable alternative till Windows 7 in July 22, 2009, although still massively too bloated an OS for most existing XP machines. You measure from the last sale not the first one:)
But that has nothing to do with my comment which is Browser market share...and the benefits from having one. Personally I love the fact your defending Microsoft treating its customers with second class versions of its software. I am running Firefox 22 on my preferred GNU/Linux right now:)
I know. IE11 doesn't run on my C64's MS-developed BASIC, either. I therefore conclude that Microsoft are a bunch of mindless jerks.
Except that Later versions of IE does not run on competing platforms or earlier iterations of itself still in use. I don't think it makes them Mindless Jerks...losers perhaps, it means that Chrome experiences continued to grow market share on the Desktop while IE continues to plummet...even without throwing in Mobile browsing where its presence continues to be non existent.
Every company discontinues support for older products
Except Microsoft's competitors haven't; which is the point Firefox and Chrome latest versions are still available for XP, and unlike Microsoft's business Model there business models demands it. You should reread my post. Its about questioning Microsoft's Business Models, not about Microsoft's unsavoury business practices and continued Monopolistic abuse.
In answer to your question "Do we need to run IE11 on MS-DOS?" the answer is yes if the costs of supporting it are less than the potential revenue generated from *converting* a customer to Internet Explorer and its defaults to its Bing search engine (and other web services), as well as a whole host of intangibles(Its online office and Windows Phone looking more attractive). In reality IE should work on Linux.
Maybe your arguing that Internet explorer cannot compete on its own merits(and never will) and has to use monopolistic abuse as a means of staying relevant, and I think I maybe agree with you.
By 2014 they will be caught up to where other browsers were in 2011, for Microsoft that's pretty impressive. Usually IE is about half a decade behind real browsers.
Firefox 14 released July 17, 2012 scored 252/500 so realistically its more like 2 years of Non-Microsoft released browsers vs Microsoft unreleased browsers. there is a graph at the bottom of the page here http://html5test.com/results/desktop.html that shows the lag in Microsofts development.
Again a reasonable post marked flamebait. The quote *directly* from the summery presented the score in a preview browser as great when in reality it is pitiful. The figures are from http://html5test.com/ and the Browser I am currently rocking is Firefox 22 (A released browser) which scores 409/500 + 10 bonus points.
I know supporting XP is against two (different?)major strategies; Selling people on Microsoft's stupid everything is a tablet so we are winning(the new strategy of copying Apple), and the old we are Monopoly, buy a new version by crippling(discontinue) the old version so we can can roll around in cash(The old strategy when they were called Micro$oft).
Ignoring problems from fragmentation, and support...and it holding back the web for many years, or how Microsoft basically won against the United States by building IE into the OS (a partially successful strategy for them). Google has started separating its first party Applications from the underlying OS(in Android) by giving its users a great internet experience.
I notice that chrome continues to rise in usage as Internet Explorer continues to Dive(Firefox too, but for different reasons)
Slashdot Mirror
LibreOffice is just as good as Office for 90% of tasks. GIMP, on the other hand, is still a dystopian nightmare compared to Photoshop, for one main reason: separate windows for everything.
Except Gimp has had a single window mode since 2.8 introduces an optional single-window mode these are the release notes http://www.gimp.org/release-notes/gimp-2.8.html here is ars reviewing it http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/05/hands-on-testing-the-gimp-28-and-its-new-single-window-interface/ the latest version of Gimp was released on Just a week ago and is 2.8.6 http://www.gimp.org/.
Although Multiple windows not that big a deal...was never a problem for me on the Mac version of photoshop.
"Desktops arent workstations.. they dont need multiple users."
No they didn't. In fact I hadn't heard the term workstation for years until Microsoft Apologist are using it as an excuse for the failing desktop market (Apple Apologists use post pc). They are the same.
No, on a tablet.
My pet peeve is when one of my kids borrows my tablet and it comes back cluttered with all his/her stuff.
http://developer.android.com/about/versions/android-4.2.html "Multiple Users
Android now allows multiple user spaces on shareable devices such as tablets. Each user on a device has his or her own set of accounts, apps, system settings, files, and any other user-associated data.
As an app developer, there’s nothing different you need to do in order for your app to work properly with multiple users on a single device. Regardless of how many users may exist on a device, the data your app saves for a given user is kept separate from the data your app saves for other users. The system keeps track of which user data belongs to the user process in which your app is running and provides your app access to only that user’s data and does not allow access to other users’ data."
Although you can get similar functionality from running any number of Apps/Third Party Roms :). My pet peeve is people too last to Google :).
If I want to launch the notepad, it's Start button, type 'Cal' and hit return. Boom. Why do I need a hierarchical menu to do that?
Folders suck.
If I want an editor I just type vi. Boom. Why do I even need a mouse?
I never thought I would see the day when Microsoft Apologists were advocating the GUI over the CLI, but Metro...a touch...no a Desklet interface...would finally push then to this madness.
tries to tell people like me that GIMP is just as good as PhotoShop, LibreOffice is just as good as MS Office
Sorry sweetness not sure of relevance Gimp is better than Photoshop http://www.adobe.com/products/catalog/software._sl_id-contentfilter_sl_catalog_sl_software_sl_photoshopcc.html which now costs $20 a month for its creative cloud version, Gimp is free...for me Gimp is a no brainer. I began using it as a consultant because I could install it on companies Desktop machines without License issues 15 years ago. I now run it from a pen drive.
LibreOffice is better than Office because the version I think I want is http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/business/office-365-small-business-premium-office-online-FX103037625.aspx which costs me $12.50 a month Its a little cheaper if I didn't need access.
What is frightening is both these companies(Adobe and Microsoft) are pushing me towards cloud(sic) versions of their products. Personally I these have no advantages but have a $32.50 Disadvantage...and have to use a always on-online DRM version.(ironically both should work on android in future or be avoided if they don't). think I'm the only one...Office launched on ios with a $100 a year fee for crippled version...nobody cared. its like its not happened.
This argument is nothing to do with Metro...which is shift in the Desktop interface to tablet one by Microsoft, in an poor attempt to convert its Desktop Monopoly into a Mobile one (say it with me ecosystem..cringe), and its a massive failure...they are installing it alongside Android now see what the article is about. This is nothing to do with comparing open source programs with Adobe and Microsoft equivalent those who have learnt to use them experience massive cost savings and smugness, although thanks for the Nostalgia.
unfortunately much like DOS, Android has been built completely devoid of a solid multi user security and management system.
...on a phone.
I think MS has a better chance of killing android than the other way around. But why should they? They make a killing off it.
"Think" is not good enough, Android right now is the most dominant OS for both Tablet and Smartphone, Markets that Microsoft(and Apple) have been in for forever (Androids first device was in 2008). Right now the chances are your Android devices outnumber your Windows Devices...and this year Android is set to overtake windows as the Dominant OS.
Before Windows 8 (And Surface) I too may have scoffed at the idea of Microsofts Desktop Monopoly been threatened by lets face it a phone OS. Ironically now PC's come with Windows 8 a Phone OS as standard the fact that it includes a better (more popular) Phone OS and massive Application Library...and Apparently its being put on Windows devices to help sell them!? If only GNU/Linux had the same advantages.
As for your comment of Microsoft making money of Android....it makes money (in reality for windows licenses we suspect) of Windows companies now making Android devices for patents to interact with...windows using fat32 and exchange. The things stripped from stock android(into the cloud), its looking short term...and it looks like Microsoft has lost control.
If your assertion were true then Android would have supplanted Windows a long time ago, it is available on such a broad and diverse range of devices that are generally a lot cheaper than the ones Windows is on. With its malware, security, inconsistency and performance problems it is no better than Windows, the OS most people desire is OSX.
I know you like to think that people want OS X, but the fact is People are aware of OSX and are not just not buying it...they are in fact buying it less 22% last quarter 2% this, and well Windows has been dropping sales...is it 5 quarters now or 6 with more doom and gloom on the horizon...yet Ironically Android is set to eclipse Windows installation this year Yeah! For those who still care Linux has been grabbing a little market share too. high fives all around.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to post than information.
>Android, as is, has the reputation of being a resource hog
No it kind of doesn't it runs on on very basic hardware..the first phone it sold on was the HTC dream. it 528 MHz Qualcomm MSM7201A ARM11 processor, 256 MB ROM, 192 MB RAM and 320 x 480 px, 3.2 in (81 mm). Lets face it it will run well on these Windows 8 hybrid devices, Which are vastly overpowered for Android.
I was going to refute every (lie) point but this is my favourite "To have Android as a desktop OS only proves Microsoft right about many of Windows 8's design choices", and can't help but find it hilarious that your advocating turning that $600 Desktop machine into A Poor Low Resolution Tablet $100 Tablet for $160.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/6/prweb10796698.htm Estimates that the Games Industry is worth....$66Billion Revenue, but only $20Billion of that was from the PC gaming...Microsoft earned that in just one quarter http://www.microsoft.com/Investor/EarningsAndFinancials/Earnings/FinancialStatements/FY13/Q3/IncomeStatements.aspx. If you want to know why computers cost so much compared to tablets...$16Billion of that $20Billion was Gross profits...Bill Gates the humanitarian says they shouldn't pay tax on it though.
Without windowing, it is still pretty much a toy OS on desktops
Ironically your describing Windows 8
When I first started to switch to mac
I reinstalled it with a friendly open Linux Distribution, I still cry in shower holding my knees tight and rocking trying to forget OS X. Fortunately they have managed to make their quality computing if overpriced computer products into glorified electronics devices, causing a drop in sales of 22% and 2%(more sane) higher than the rest of the PC market, fortunately there is devices like Pixel from Google to replace Apples offerings.
Android has basically become, like most tablets are, the modern equivalent of a thin client for the internet. And frankly, that's all a lot of users care about. It may not be the ideal of most people on /. for daily use, but I know a lot of teenage kids would be quite satisfied with that.
Ironically with Metro, and Secure boot, Microsoft Lets get in on the software Store, Windows look like a poor mobile device...with all the markup that comes with Intel and Microsoft walking home with a 70% Gross Margin. This is about helping to sell those failing to compete because of Price, by offering Android as an incentive...and its a good one, as Unlike Windows people want and Desire Android.
Gnome is aweful, they took away one of the biggest and most useful things for Desktop computing - minimizing. Until people stop kidding themselves that people don't need minimize Gnome 3's Shell will never gain true adoption.
Gnome 3 is great...Gnome Shell is awful(and some of the changes but not all to files). For Normal desktop use.
I would love a hybrid(kill for) Gnome/Android Desktop with a decent touch screen monitor(4X) on MicroITX ARM motherboard. Somewhere there is a balance between touchscreen use and desktop use, and Maybe as part of that Gnome Shell maybe better...but I doubt it.
I am tired of Company X getting out of the Desktop game(Samsung this week) chasing Apples shrinking margins, rather than reinventing the Desktop Market with something new, and Gnandroid would be my choice (or Kandroid or Xfandroid as a push).
Fact is that IE still fills a number of needs for enterprise and corporate customers.
Its not a fact. In reality any firm wanting a cutting edge advantage (as well as others) will avoid IE like a plague. The reality is targeting a platform dependant in today BYOD rather than a cutting edge browser specification, for internal...or mobile deployment is incredibly foolish.
Less like comparing brands...more like hiring a serial killer as a baby sitter.
As someone who uses Windows at home, there are two main reasons:
1.) Games
2.) I use Linux at work, and it's nice to have my OS piss me off in different ways depending on where I am
Increasingly the games I buy are cross platform and DRM free. Tying myself down to one platform is something I won't do.
Oh cry me a river.
I work for a dirt cheap client. Even we have been moving off XP for a year now.
Not pretending to be a Linux user today. I like you more as a straight Microsoft Apologist. XP exists on 220,000,000 computers. I personally love the fact that you use an Apple excuse to defend Microsoft it, shows how overpriced and under-supported Windows is.
Oh? Where can I find the repository for security patches for linux 1.0?
https://www.kernel.org/.
The reality though by compitors I unsurprisingly meant (but not limited to :) Firefox http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/new/ and Chrome https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/browser/
XP exists on about 20% of computers...or about 220,000,000 which is why the point is about XP :)
Supporting XP is especially complicated for IE,
Then perhaps they should have designed IE explorer to be cross platform :). The fact that IE does not run on Android soon to be the most dominant platform is an example of what a failure it is. The fact that is supplies its own customers with a second class experience.
Windows XP was released in October of 2001.
Yet was not replaced for till Vista was RTM as of January 30, 2007...although XP was still the only viable alternative till Windows 7 in July 22, 2009, although still massively too bloated an OS for most existing XP machines. You measure from the last sale not the first one :)
But that has nothing to do with my comment which is Browser market share...and the benefits from having one. Personally I love the fact your defending Microsoft treating its customers with second class versions of its software. I am running Firefox 22 on my preferred GNU/Linux right now :)
I know. IE11 doesn't run on my C64's MS-developed BASIC, either. I therefore conclude that Microsoft are a bunch of mindless jerks.
Except that Later versions of IE does not run on competing platforms or earlier iterations of itself still in use. I don't think it makes them Mindless Jerks...losers perhaps, it means that Chrome experiences continued to grow market share on the Desktop while IE continues to plummet...even without throwing in Mobile browsing where its presence continues to be non existent.
Every company discontinues support for older products
Except Microsoft's competitors haven't; which is the point Firefox and Chrome latest versions are still available for XP, and unlike Microsoft's business Model there business models demands it. You should reread my post. Its about questioning Microsoft's Business Models, not about Microsoft's unsavoury business practices and continued Monopolistic abuse.
In answer to your question "Do we need to run IE11 on MS-DOS?" the answer is yes if the costs of supporting it are less than the potential revenue generated from *converting* a customer to Internet Explorer and its defaults to its Bing search engine (and other web services), as well as a whole host of intangibles(Its online office and Windows Phone looking more attractive). In reality IE should work on Linux.
Maybe your arguing that Internet explorer cannot compete on its own merits(and never will) and has to use monopolistic abuse as a means of staying relevant, and I think I maybe agree with you.
By 2014 they will be caught up to where other browsers were in 2011, for Microsoft that's pretty impressive. Usually IE is about half a decade behind real browsers.
Firefox 14 released July 17, 2012 scored 252/500 so realistically its more like 2 years of Non-Microsoft released browsers vs Microsoft unreleased browsers. there is a graph at the bottom of the page here http://html5test.com/results/desktop.html that shows the lag in Microsofts development.
IE11 scores 351/500 + 2 bonus point
Again a reasonable post marked flamebait. The quote *directly* from the summery presented the score in a preview browser as great when in reality it is pitiful. The figures are from http://html5test.com/ and the Browser I am currently rocking is Firefox 22 (A released browser) which scores 409/500 + 10 bonus points.
I know supporting XP is against two (different?)major strategies; Selling people on Microsoft's stupid everything is a tablet so we are winning(the new strategy of copying Apple), and the old we are Monopoly, buy a new version by crippling(discontinue) the old version so we can can roll around in cash(The old strategy when they were called Micro$oft).
Ignoring problems from fragmentation, and support...and it holding back the web for many years, or how Microsoft basically won against the United States by building IE into the OS (a partially successful strategy for them). Google has started separating its first party Applications from the underlying OS(in Android) by giving its users a great internet experience.
I notice that chrome continues to rise in usage as Internet Explorer continues to Dive(Firefox too, but for different reasons)
These graphs say it all http://www.w3counter.com/trends.