Discussion:
MicroSnot just sneezed all over my PC
Add Reply
Gareth Evans
2020-06-24 16:30:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Does the arrogance of MicroSnot know no bounds?

Not content with forcing me to have automatic
updates for Windows 10, last night's updates
brought up MicroSnot Edge but without an
option to kill it before entering it, and then
it was shortcutted both onto the desktop as
well as the task bar.

I look forward to the dastardly pile of
bovine excrement that is MicroSnot finally
crashing and burning!
Scott Lurndal
2020-06-24 16:47:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gareth Evans
Does the arrogance of MicroSnot know no bounds?
Not content with forcing me to have automatic
updates for Windows 10, last night's updates
brought up MicroSnot Edge but without an
option to kill it before entering it, and then
it was shortcutted both onto the desktop as
well as the task bar.
I look forward to the dastardly pile of
bovine excrement that is MicroSnot finally
crashing and burning!
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
Quadibloc
2020-06-24 20:58:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.

There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.

And if you buy a Macintosh, you won't be able to upgrade it except in limited
ways, unless you buy a system costing nearly five figures.

Those who can use Linux generally do so, but unfortunately, most people don't
have much of a choice.

John Savard
Scott Lurndal
2020-06-24 22:00:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
Those who can use Linux generally do so, but unfortunately, most people don't
have much of a choice.
Gareth claims to be a retired computer professional; that's not 'most people'.
J. Clarke
2020-06-24 23:26:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 13:58:05 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
Searching the App Store gives me 928 hits for "drawing", 330 for CAD,
926 for "math", 182 hits for "engineering", and so on so it looks like
there's quite a lot available for the Mac, leaving aside that
underneath the GUI it's a Unix box.

As for Linux, _everything_ in Linux is "third party" and most of it
open source.
Post by Quadibloc
And if you buy a Macintosh, you won't be able to upgrade it except in limited
ways, unless you buy a system costing nearly five figures.
Why buy a Macintosh? Apple doesn't _want_ you to put their OS on your
PC but they don't _stop_ you.
Post by Quadibloc
Those who can use Linux generally do so, but unfortunately, most people don't
have much of a choice.
John Savard
Quadibloc
2020-06-25 04:36:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Searching the App Store gives me 928 hits for "drawing", 330 for CAD,
926 for "math", 182 hits for "engineering", and so on so it looks like
there's quite a lot available for the Mac, leaving aside that
underneath the GUI it's a Unix box.
True, there's a lot of BSD in there. I can't argue this point in detail, but
basically because of the small market share of the Macintosh, those software
makers who do address it... benefit from having less competition.
Post by J. Clarke
Why buy a Macintosh? Apple doesn't _want_ you to put their OS on your
PC but they don't _stop_ you.
Aside from the legal or ethical issue, the market share of the Macintosh is in
such a parlous state as to cause its effective value to reach a point where even
"if they gave them away", not counting the value of the hardware - which is what
that is - it's still questionable as to whether it's of interest.

John Savard
Douglas Miller
2020-06-25 00:22:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
...
John Savard
I will say that I was pleasantly surprised about 10 years ago when I immediately found top-notch scanner software for my new MAC mini. I had to buy it, sure, but it was great and they supported all my scanner devices (film, slide, flatbed). So, I'm not a believer that Windows is the only option. Of course, I don't use a lot of third-party software. But these days even Linux has got a lot.
Peter Flass
2020-06-25 12:53:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Douglas Miller
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
...
John Savard
I will say that I was pleasantly surprised about 10 years ago when I
immediately found top-notch scanner software for my new MAC mini. I had
to buy it, sure, but it was great and they supported all my scanner
devices (film, slide, flatbed). So, I'm not a believer that Windows is
the only option. Of course, I don't use a lot of third-party software.
But these days even Linux has got a lot.
I can certainly get everything I want for Linux. Some specialized programs
may nominally only run on windoze, but ai think there’s an installer for
Linux now that will let you install most of them.
--
Pete
J. Clarke
2020-06-25 22:58:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 05:53:49 -0700, Peter Flass
Post by Peter Flass
Post by Douglas Miller
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
...
John Savard
I will say that I was pleasantly surprised about 10 years ago when I
immediately found top-notch scanner software for my new MAC mini. I had
to buy it, sure, but it was great and they supported all my scanner
devices (film, slide, flatbed). So, I'm not a believer that Windows is
the only option. Of course, I don't use a lot of third-party software.
But these days even Linux has got a lot.
I can certainly get everything I want for Linux. Some specialized programs
may nominally only run on windoze, but ai think there’s an installer for
Linux now that will let you install most of them.
Only if you run Windows in VM. The WINE fans will tell you, oh, no,
everything runs on WINE. This may be true for some level of "run" but
if you are paid to be doing work your boss is not going to be happy
when you report that you didn't get the job done because you were
screwing around trying to get the software to run properly on an
unsupported operating system.
Quadibloc
2020-06-26 06:11:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
I can certainly get everything I want for Linux.
But maybe other people have different wants than you.

John Savard
Peter Flass
2020-06-26 16:58:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Flass
I can certainly get everything I want for Linux.
But maybe other people have different wants than you.
I’m sure they might. As I said in the part you didn’t quote that there are
still a few proprietary products that are locked into windoze that people
might need to use. Of course one could always run windoze in a VM.
Post by Quadibloc
John Savard
--
Pete
J. Clarke
2020-06-26 21:58:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 09:58:14 -0700, Peter Flass
Post by Peter Flass
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Flass
I can certainly get everything I want for Linux.
But maybe other people have different wants than you.
I’m sure they might. As I said in the part you didn’t quote that there are
still a few proprietary products that are locked into windoze that people
might need to use. Of course one could always run windoze in a VM.
Which will cause it to truly doze. Can a Windows application acccess
CUDA cores from a VM in Linux?
Dave Garland
2020-06-25 02:32:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
I've found there's a ton of third-party software available for Linux
(and Linux supports some hardware Win doesn't, such as my
no-longer-MS-supported scanner; of course, the opposite is also true).
Mint comes with two different software managers (plus you can always
use the command-line options... before Win everybody used command
line, even people who weren't nerds, I know because I supported them),
and installing is usually as easy as clicking on an item and saying
"get it". And the price for most *ux software is $0.00.

Quality isn't always consistent, but the quality of Windows software
isn't always consistent either. Even software from MS.
Charlie Gibbs
2020-06-25 06:11:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dave Garland
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
I've found there's a ton of third-party software available for Linux
(and Linux supports some hardware Win doesn't, such as my
no-longer-MS-supported scanner; of course, the opposite is also true).
Mint comes with two different software managers (plus you can always
use the command-line options... before Win everybody used command
line, even people who weren't nerds, I know because I supported them),
and installing is usually as easy as clicking on an item and saying
"get it". And the price for most *ux software is $0.00.
Quality isn't always consistent, but the quality of Windows software
isn't always consistent either. Even software from MS.
That's not so. M$ software quality is indeed consistent.
Consistently awful, that is. 1/2 :-)
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
J. Clarke
2020-06-25 23:00:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Dave Garland
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
I've found there's a ton of third-party software available for Linux
(and Linux supports some hardware Win doesn't, such as my
no-longer-MS-supported scanner; of course, the opposite is also true).
Mint comes with two different software managers (plus you can always
use the command-line options... before Win everybody used command
line, even people who weren't nerds, I know because I supported them),
and installing is usually as easy as clicking on an item and saying
"get it". And the price for most *ux software is $0.00.
Quality isn't always consistent, but the quality of Windows software
isn't always consistent either. Even software from MS.
That's not so. M$ software quality is indeed consistent.
Consistently awful, that is. 1/2 :-)
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Dan Espen
2020-06-25 23:28:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Dave Garland
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
I've found there's a ton of third-party software available for Linux
(and Linux supports some hardware Win doesn't, such as my
no-longer-MS-supported scanner; of course, the opposite is also true).
Mint comes with two different software managers (plus you can always
use the command-line options... before Win everybody used command
line, even people who weren't nerds, I know because I supported them),
and installing is usually as easy as clicking on an item and saying
"get it". And the price for most *ux software is $0.00.
Quality isn't always consistent, but the quality of Windows software
isn't always consistent either. Even software from MS.
That's not so. M$ software quality is indeed consistent.
Consistently awful, that is. 1/2 :-)
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Have you tried it?

I would guess the GNU APL package might come up short,
not the multiple cores part or the LibreOffice part.
--
Dan Espen
J. Clarke
2020-06-25 23:46:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan Espen
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Dave Garland
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
I've found there's a ton of third-party software available for Linux
(and Linux supports some hardware Win doesn't, such as my
no-longer-MS-supported scanner; of course, the opposite is also true).
Mint comes with two different software managers (plus you can always
use the command-line options... before Win everybody used command
line, even people who weren't nerds, I know because I supported them),
and installing is usually as easy as clicking on an item and saying
"get it". And the price for most *ux software is $0.00.
Quality isn't always consistent, but the quality of Windows software
isn't always consistent either. Even software from MS.
That's not so. M$ software quality is indeed consistent.
Consistently awful, that is. 1/2 :-)
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Have you tried it?
I have done it, demonstrated it, we use it as a process at work, and
the CEO of APL2000 seemed to be somewhat impressed. We normally only
run 8 cores as that gets things done in the timeframe we need, but we
have demonstrated 60 on the AWS cloud.
Post by Dan Espen
I would guess the GNU APL package might come up short,
not the multiple cores part or the LibreOffice part.
One of the things that makes it work is that APL2000 has a _very_
clean COM server. How would GNU APL interact with Open Office?
Dan Espen
2020-06-26 00:02:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dan Espen
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Dave Garland
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
I've found there's a ton of third-party software available for
Linux (and Linux supports some hardware Win doesn't, such as my
no-longer-MS-supported scanner; of course, the opposite is also
true). Mint comes with two different software managers (plus you
can always use the command-line options... before Win everybody
used command line, even people who weren't nerds, I know because I
supported them), and installing is usually as easy as clicking on
an item and saying "get it". And the price for most *ux software
is $0.00.
Quality isn't always consistent, but the quality of Windows
software isn't always consistent either. Even software from MS.
That's not so. M$ software quality is indeed consistent.
Consistently awful, that is. 1/2 :-)
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite?
And don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office
managing 60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Have you tried it?
I have done it, demonstrated it, we use it as a process at work, and
the CEO of APL2000 seemed to be somewhat impressed. We normally only
run 8 cores as that gets things done in the timeframe we need, but we
have demonstrated 60 on the AWS cloud.
Post by Dan Espen
I would guess the GNU APL package might come up short, not the
multiple cores part or the LibreOffice part.
One of the things that makes it work is that APL2000 has a _very_
clean COM server. How would GNU APL interact with Open Office?
I've never done it but I believe LibreOffice can be scripted similar to
MS Office.
--
Dan Espen
J. Clarke
2020-06-26 00:10:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan Espen
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dan Espen
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Dave Garland
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
I've found there's a ton of third-party software available for
Linux (and Linux supports some hardware Win doesn't, such as my
no-longer-MS-supported scanner; of course, the opposite is also
true). Mint comes with two different software managers (plus you
can always use the command-line options... before Win everybody
used command line, even people who weren't nerds, I know because I
supported them), and installing is usually as easy as clicking on
an item and saying "get it". And the price for most *ux software
is $0.00.
Quality isn't always consistent, but the quality of Windows
software isn't always consistent either. Even software from MS.
That's not so. M$ software quality is indeed consistent.
Consistently awful, that is. 1/2 :-)
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite?
And don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office
managing 60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Have you tried it?
I have done it, demonstrated it, we use it as a process at work, and
the CEO of APL2000 seemed to be somewhat impressed. We normally only
run 8 cores as that gets things done in the timeframe we need, but we
have demonstrated 60 on the AWS cloud.
Post by Dan Espen
I would guess the GNU APL package might come up short, not the
multiple cores part or the LibreOffice part.
One of the things that makes it work is that APL2000 has a _very_
clean COM server. How would GNU APL interact with Open Office?
I've never done it but I believe LibreOffice can be scripted similar to
MS Office.
That's not the problem. You have a GNU APL workspace. You need to
set some parameters in the workspace, start it running, detect when it
has finished, grab some data out of it, save it to a new location, and
if it crashes you have to recognize that it crashed and log the crash.

It isn't just scripting the office application, it is using the office
application to control another program provided by a different vendor.
Dan Espen
2020-06-26 02:31:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dan Espen
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dan Espen
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Dave Garland
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
I've found there's a ton of third-party software available for
Linux (and Linux supports some hardware Win doesn't, such as my
no-longer-MS-supported scanner; of course, the opposite is also
true). Mint comes with two different software managers (plus you
can always use the command-line options... before Win everybody
used command line, even people who weren't nerds, I know because I
supported them), and installing is usually as easy as clicking on
an item and saying "get it". And the price for most *ux software
is $0.00.
Quality isn't always consistent, but the quality of Windows
software isn't always consistent either. Even software from MS.
That's not so. M$ software quality is indeed consistent.
Consistently awful, that is. 1/2 :-)
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite?
And don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office
managing 60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Have you tried it?
I have done it, demonstrated it, we use it as a process at work, and
the CEO of APL2000 seemed to be somewhat impressed. We normally only
run 8 cores as that gets things done in the timeframe we need, but we
have demonstrated 60 on the AWS cloud.
Post by Dan Espen
I would guess the GNU APL package might come up short, not the
multiple cores part or the LibreOffice part.
One of the things that makes it work is that APL2000 has a _very_
clean COM server. How would GNU APL interact with Open Office?
I've never done it but I believe LibreOffice can be scripted similar to
MS Office.
That's not the problem. You have a GNU APL workspace. You need to
set some parameters in the workspace, start it running, detect when it
has finished, grab some data out of it, save it to a new location, and
if it crashes you have to recognize that it crashed and log the crash.
It isn't just scripting the office application, it is using the office
application to control another program provided by a different vendor.
The one time I saw office being used, it was more of a slave, they
passed in documents and had office format them. They said at the time
it was Star Office compatible.

One more thing in the list of things I don't know, thanks.
--
Dan Espen
J. Clarke
2020-06-26 03:53:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan Espen
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dan Espen
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dan Espen
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Dave Garland
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for
either one.
I've found there's a ton of third-party software available for
Linux (and Linux supports some hardware Win doesn't, such as my
no-longer-MS-supported scanner; of course, the opposite is also
true). Mint comes with two different software managers (plus you
can always use the command-line options... before Win everybody
used command line, even people who weren't nerds, I know because I
supported them), and installing is usually as easy as clicking on
an item and saying "get it". And the price for most *ux software
is $0.00.
Quality isn't always consistent, but the quality of Windows
software isn't always consistent either. Even software from MS.
That's not so. M$ software quality is indeed consistent.
Consistently awful, that is. 1/2 :-)
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite?
And don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office
managing 60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Have you tried it?
I have done it, demonstrated it, we use it as a process at work, and
the CEO of APL2000 seemed to be somewhat impressed. We normally only
run 8 cores as that gets things done in the timeframe we need, but we
have demonstrated 60 on the AWS cloud.
Post by Dan Espen
I would guess the GNU APL package might come up short, not the
multiple cores part or the LibreOffice part.
One of the things that makes it work is that APL2000 has a _very_
clean COM server. How would GNU APL interact with Open Office?
I've never done it but I believe LibreOffice can be scripted similar to
MS Office.
That's not the problem. You have a GNU APL workspace. You need to
set some parameters in the workspace, start it running, detect when it
has finished, grab some data out of it, save it to a new location, and
if it crashes you have to recognize that it crashed and log the crash.
It isn't just scripting the office application, it is using the office
application to control another program provided by a different vendor.
The one time I saw office being used, it was more of a slave, they
passed in documents and had office format them. They said at the time
it was Star Office compatible.
One more thing in the list of things I don't know, thanks.
That's OpenOffice, not Microsoft Office. OpenOffice used to be a
proprietary product called StarOffice, and now it's got a fork called
"LibreOfffice" (Oracle and Open Source politics involved). In theory
OpenOffice supports the same scripting as Microsoft Office. In
practice I've found it frustrating whenever I've played with it.
Scott Lurndal
2020-06-26 14:22:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dan Espen
I've never done it but I believe LibreOffice can be scripted similar to
MS Office.
That's not the problem. You have a GNU APL workspace. You need to
set some parameters in the workspace, start it running, detect when it
has finished, grab some data out of it, save it to a new location, and
if it crashes you have to recognize that it crashed and log the crash.
It isn't just scripting the office application, it is using the office
application to control another program provided by a different vendor.
Isn't that what shell scripts are designed for? Use the right tool
for the job.
Peter Flass
2020-06-26 16:58:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Dan Espen
I've never done it but I believe LibreOffice can be scripted similar to
MS Office.
That's not the problem. You have a GNU APL workspace. You need to
set some parameters in the workspace, start it running, detect when it
has finished, grab some data out of it, save it to a new location, and
if it crashes you have to recognize that it crashed and log the crash.
It isn't just scripting the office application, it is using the office
application to control another program provided by a different vendor.
Isn't that what shell scripts are designed for? Use the right tool
for the job.
It’s probably a piece of Topsy software, it “just growed.” I would imagine
somebody tried it as a one-shot and it went from there. I would also
imagine it would be a horror to rewrite it to do it right. It’s certainly
possible to do COM stuff from a program, or probably even a script.
--
Pete
Quadibloc
2020-06-26 06:12:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Microsoft Office can run APL?

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-06-26 21:58:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 23:12:23 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Microsoft Office can run APL?
Yes, it can. You have to have the right APL interpreter though.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2020-06-26 06:12:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 19:00:02 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
This is not a common use case for an office suite, arguably it is
not even a sane one. Most people use them to create documents, which is
what they were designed for. In that area the descendants of Star Office
work fine for folks who like that kind of thing.

As for better, that's at least partly opinion. I think sc is a
better spreadsheet than Excel because it doesn't try to be anything else
and gets the job done. I think troff and LaTeX are both better word
processors than Word or LibreOffice because I can knock out documents much
more quickly and reliably with them. Oh yes and neither have changed their
interface in all the decades I've been using them, documents written in the
1990s still render perfectly (older ones would too if I had any to hand).
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Thomas Koenig
2020-06-26 07:13:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 19:00:02 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
This is not a common use case for an office suite, arguably it is
not even a sane one. Most people use them to create documents, which is
what they were designed for. In that area the descendants of Star Office
work fine for folks who like that kind of thing.
As much as it pains me to say a good word about Microsoft, PowerPoint
is _much_ better than LibreOffice Impress.
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
I think troff and LaTeX are both better word
processors than Word or LibreOffice because I can knock out documents much
more quickly and reliably with them. Oh yes and neither have changed their
interface in all the decades I've been using them, documents written in the
1990s still render perfectly (older ones would too if I had any to hand).
Well, there was the \documentstyle to \documentclass changeover... flag
day.
Scott Lurndal
2020-06-26 14:24:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 19:00:02 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
This is not a common use case for an office suite, arguably it is
not even a sane one. Most people use them to create documents, which is
what they were designed for. In that area the descendants of Star Office
work fine for folks who like that kind of thing.
As much as it pains me to say a good word about Microsoft, PowerPoint
is _much_ better than LibreOffice Impress.
troff with the 'mv' macro package is sufficient.

.A This viewgraph is about
.B Point A
.C Point A.1
.C Point A.2
.B Point B
.B Point C

Eyecandy isn't necessary. Animation isn't necessary.
Thomas Koenig
2020-06-26 16:06:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Thomas Koenig
As much as it pains me to say a good word about Microsoft, PowerPoint
is _much_ better than LibreOffice Impress.
troff with the 'mv' macro package is sufficient.
.A This viewgraph is about
.B Point A
Eyecandy isn't necessary. Animation isn't necessary.
If all you want to convey is text bullet points, sure.

When I make slides for work, there is usually a bit more: Things
like graphs, sketches, technical drawings, tables, flow sheets etc.
A bit more complex than bullet points.

I used LaTeX for my slides at university. LaTeX is almost
infinitely superior to Word for any serious text, my only gripe
is figure placement. But LaTeX for slides... no.
Andreas Eder
2020-07-10 15:32:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thomas Koenig
I used LaTeX for my slides at university. LaTeX is almost
infinitely superior to Word for any serious text, my only gripe
is figure placement. But LaTeX for slides... no.
Have you looked at beamer? Yjay is far superior to powerpoint in my
opinion. And far faster to write for me.

'Andreas
Gareth Evans
2020-07-10 16:29:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andreas Eder
Post by Thomas Koenig
I used LaTeX for my slides at university. LaTeX is almost
infinitely superior to Word for any serious text, my only gripe
is figure placement. But LaTeX for slides... no.
Have you looked at beamer? Yjay is far superior to powerpoint in my
opinion. And far faster to write for me.
Is there a (Slacko) Linux package that will read (and maybe
write) .DOCX files (in order to circumvent MicroSnot forever
moving the goalposts as to what is the industry standard)?

I just remembered that I dual booted an old laptop 5 years
ago but not done anything with it since.
Charlie Gibbs
2020-07-10 20:28:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gareth Evans
Post by Andreas Eder
Post by Thomas Koenig
I used LaTeX for my slides at university. LaTeX is almost
infinitely superior to Word for any serious text, my only gripe
is figure placement. But LaTeX for slides... no.
Have you looked at beamer? Yjay is far superior to powerpoint in my
opinion. And far faster to write for me.
Is there a (Slacko) Linux package that will read (and maybe
write) .DOCX files (in order to circumvent MicroSnot forever
moving the goalposts as to what is the industry standard)?
Try LibreOffice.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
Peter Flass
2020-07-10 23:04:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Gareth Evans
Post by Andreas Eder
Post by Thomas Koenig
I used LaTeX for my slides at university. LaTeX is almost
infinitely superior to Word for any serious text, my only gripe
is figure placement. But LaTeX for slides... no.
Have you looked at beamer? Yjay is far superior to powerpoint in my
opinion. And far faster to write for me.
Is there a (Slacko) Linux package that will read (and maybe
write) .DOCX files (in order to circumvent MicroSnot forever
moving the goalposts as to what is the industry standard)?
Try LibreOffice.
From what I read it’s a bit iffy, but I didn’t note the date of those
posts.
--
Pete
Andy Leighton
2020-07-11 09:42:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
J. Clarke
2020-07-10 23:05:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:29:54 +0100, Gareth Evans
Post by Gareth Evans
Post by Andreas Eder
Post by Thomas Koenig
I used LaTeX for my slides at university. LaTeX is almost
infinitely superior to Word for any serious text, my only gripe
is figure placement. But LaTeX for slides... no.
Have you looked at beamer? Yjay is far superior to powerpoint in my
opinion. And far faster to write for me.
Is there a (Slacko) Linux package that will read (and maybe
write) .DOCX files (in order to circumvent MicroSnot forever
moving the goalposts as to what is the industry standard)?
You do know that the document format used by Word is an ISO standard
do you not?
Post by Gareth Evans
I just remembered that I dual booted an old laptop 5 years
ago but not done anything with it since.
Charlie Gibbs
2020-07-11 00:30:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:29:54 +0100, Gareth Evans
Post by Gareth Evans
Post by Andreas Eder
Post by Thomas Koenig
I used LaTeX for my slides at university. LaTeX is almost
infinitely superior to Word for any serious text, my only gripe
is figure placement. But LaTeX for slides... no.
Have you looked at beamer? Yjay is far superior to powerpoint in my
opinion. And far faster to write for me.
Is there a (Slacko) Linux package that will read (and maybe
write) .DOCX files (in order to circumvent MicroSnot forever
moving the goalposts as to what is the industry standard)?
You do know that the document format used by Word is an ISO standard
do you not?
That's news to me. I remember the days when the .doc file format
was covered by an NDA - and that someone in this newsgroup signed
it and said we really didn't want to know what was inside.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
J. Clarke
2020-07-11 00:58:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:29:54 +0100, Gareth Evans
Post by Gareth Evans
Post by Andreas Eder
Post by Thomas Koenig
I used LaTeX for my slides at university. LaTeX is almost
infinitely superior to Word for any serious text, my only gripe
is figure placement. But LaTeX for slides... no.
Have you looked at beamer? Yjay is far superior to powerpoint in my
opinion. And far faster to write for me.
Is there a (Slacko) Linux package that will read (and maybe
write) .DOCX files (in order to circumvent MicroSnot forever
moving the goalposts as to what is the industry standard)?
You do know that the document format used by Word is an ISO standard
do you not?
That's news to me. I remember the days when the .doc file format
was covered by an NDA - and that someone in this newsgroup signed
it and said we really didn't want to know what was inside.
That was doc. docx is defined by ISO29500. So is xlsx. Change the
extension on either to .zip and double-click it (in Windows 10 anyway)
and it opens up into a set of xml files.
Charlie Gibbs
2020-07-11 18:21:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by J. Clarke
You do know that the document format used by Word is an ISO standard
do you not?
That's news to me. I remember the days when the .doc file format
was covered by an NDA - and that someone in this newsgroup signed
it and said we really didn't want to know what was inside.
That was doc. docx is defined by ISO29500. So is xlsx. Change the
extension on either to .zip and double-click it (in Windows 10 anyway)
and it opens up into a set of xml files.
I did discover that much. (Although in Linux it was much easier -
hexdump revealed the PK magic bytes, and unzip unpacked it without
having to rename it.) I suppose it adds a lot of flexibility, but
for simple documents it looks like gratuitous complexity. Hopefully
with ISO behind it there won't be any proprietary gotchas.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
Gareth Evans
2020-07-11 12:56:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:29:54 +0100, Gareth Evans
Post by Gareth Evans
Post by Andreas Eder
Post by Thomas Koenig
I used LaTeX for my slides at university. LaTeX is almost
infinitely superior to Word for any serious text, my only gripe
is figure placement. But LaTeX for slides... no.
Have you looked at beamer? Yjay is far superior to powerpoint in my
opinion. And far faster to write for me.
Is there a (Slacko) Linux package that will read (and maybe
write) .DOCX files (in order to circumvent MicroSnot forever
moving the goalposts as to what is the industry standard)?
You do know that the document format used by Word is an ISO standard
do you not?
No, I did not, but I had in mind MicroSnot's EEE policy;

Embrace, Extend, Exterminate.
Jim Jackson
2020-07-11 16:07:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:29:54 +0100, Gareth Evans
Post by Gareth Evans
Is there a (Slacko) Linux package that will read (and maybe
write) .DOCX files (in order to circumvent MicroSnot forever
moving the goalposts as to what is the industry standard)?
You do know that the document format used by Word is an ISO standard
do you not?
Oh memories memories. Microsoft strong-armed it's new docx xml based
format through the standardisation process in the early noughties.
Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML has some
comments on it (3rd paragraph under the Standardisation Process
heading).

They were shamed into doing something because a lot of big organisations
were getting jittery about format lock-in (doc being proprietary), and
there was already an Internation Standard, Open Document, which they
were not going t osupport because they didn't invent it. Microsoft at
the time was aggressively trying to protect it's dominant position.
Interestingly they seem to have changed a lot in the intervening years.
J. Clarke
2020-07-11 16:56:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 16:07:27 -0000 (UTC), Jim Jackson
Post by Jim Jackson
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 17:29:54 +0100, Gareth Evans
Post by Gareth Evans
Is there a (Slacko) Linux package that will read (and maybe
write) .DOCX files (in order to circumvent MicroSnot forever
moving the goalposts as to what is the industry standard)?
You do know that the document format used by Word is an ISO standard
do you not?
Oh memories memories. Microsoft strong-armed it's new docx xml based
format through the standardisation process in the early noughties.
Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML has some
comments on it (3rd paragraph under the Standardisation Process
heading).
They were shamed into doing something because a lot of big organisations
were getting jittery about format lock-in (doc being proprietary), and
there was already an Internation Standard, Open Document, which they
were not going t osupport because they didn't invent it. Microsoft at
the time was aggressively trying to protect it's dominant position.
Interestingly they seem to have changed a lot in the intervening years.
They found other ways. One big one is providing the average user
quite remarkably capable development capability that is locked into a
Microsoft interprocess communication protocol that has wide third
party support. If we had to go to LibreOffice our productivity would
tank until we recreated most of our automation code--no, it does not
run in LibreOffice and can't be easily ported.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2020-07-11 17:34:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 12:56:57 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
They found other ways. One big one is providing the average user
quite remarkably capable development capability that is locked into a
Microsoft interprocess communication protocol that has wide third
party support. If we had to go to LibreOffice our productivity would
tank until we recreated most of our automation code--no, it does not
run in LibreOffice and can't be easily ported.
I still find the idea of using an office suite for process
automation bizarre.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Charlie Gibbs
2020-07-11 18:24:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 12:56:57 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
They found other ways. One big one is providing the average user
quite remarkably capable development capability that is locked into a
Microsoft interprocess communication protocol that has wide third
party support. If we had to go to LibreOffice our productivity would
tank until we recreated most of our automation code--no, it does not
run in LibreOffice and can't be easily ported.
I still find the idea of using an office suite for process
automation bizarre.
Perhaps, but look at some of the things that are being done by
people who live in spreadsheet land.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
J. Clarke
2020-07-11 19:38:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 12:56:57 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
They found other ways. One big one is providing the average user
quite remarkably capable development capability that is locked into a
Microsoft interprocess communication protocol that has wide third
party support. If we had to go to LibreOffice our productivity would
tank until we recreated most of our automation code--no, it does not
run in LibreOffice and can't be easily ported.
I still find the idea of using an office suite for process
automation bizarre.
Perhaps, but look at some of the things that are being done by
people who live in spreadsheet land.
Look at it from a different perspective.

Microsoft Visual Basic for Applications is a programming environment
that includes libraries that provide the functionality of a full
featured office suite including a spreadsheet, word processor,
database manager, and slideshow presenter and is in addition supported
by a wide variety of third party libraries.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2020-07-11 21:35:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:38:12 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
I still find the idea of using an office suite for process
automation bizarre.
Perhaps, but look at some of the things that are being done by
people who live in spreadsheet land.
Look at it from a different perspective.
Microsoft Visual Basic for Applications is a programming environment
that includes libraries that provide the functionality of a full
featured office suite including a spreadsheet, word processor,
database manager, and slideshow presenter and is in addition supported
by a wide variety of third party libraries.
I see your point, I've always thought of it as a scripting language
bolted onto a bunch of office applications and I think it started that way
before it became what you describe.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2020-07-11 19:38:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 11 Jul 2020 18:24:47 GMT
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 12:56:57 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
They found other ways. One big one is providing the average user
quite remarkably capable development capability that is locked into a
Microsoft interprocess communication protocol that has wide third
party support. If we had to go to LibreOffice our productivity would
tank until we recreated most of our automation code--no, it does not
run in LibreOffice and can't be easily ported.
I still find the idea of using an office suite for process
automation bizarre.
Perhaps, but look at some of the things that are being done by
people who live in spreadsheet land.
I have seen, I find it bizarre.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Dennis Boone
2020-07-11 19:20:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
You do know that the document format used by Word is an ISO standard
do you not?
It's probably more correct to say that at one point ISO wrote
down what M$ products were doing, and that M$ has been diverging
from there ever since.

De
J. Clarke
2020-07-11 19:54:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dennis Boone
Post by J. Clarke
You do know that the document format used by Word is an ISO standard
do you not?
down what M$ products were doing, and that M$ has been diverging
from there ever since.
No, Microsoft wrote down what their products were doing and crammed it
down ISO's throat whether ISO liked it or not.

Do you have evidence that the current Microsoft products are not
compliant with ISO29500?
Charlie Gibbs
2020-06-26 16:41:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 19:00:02 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
This is not a common use case for an office suite, arguably it is
not even a sane one. Most people use them to create documents, which is
what they were designed for. In that area the descendants of Star Office
work fine for folks who like that kind of thing.
As much as it pains me to say a good word about Microsoft, PowerPoint
is _much_ better than LibreOffice Impress.
troff with the 'mv' macro package is sufficient.
.A This viewgraph is about
.B Point A
.C Point A.1
.C Point A.2
.B Point B
.B Point C
Eyecandy isn't necessary. Animation isn't necessary.
You know that. I know that. But J. Random Luser not only doesn't know
that, but doesn't _want_ to know that. And neither does his manager.

"Ohhhhh... shiny!"
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
Peter Flass
2020-06-26 17:00:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 19:00:02 -0400
Post by J. Clarke
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
This is not a common use case for an office suite, arguably it is
not even a sane one. Most people use them to create documents, which is
what they were designed for. In that area the descendants of Star Office
work fine for folks who like that kind of thing.
As much as it pains me to say a good word about Microsoft, PowerPoint
is _much_ better than LibreOffice Impress.
troff with the 'mv' macro package is sufficient.
.A This viewgraph is about
.B Point A
.C Point A.1
.C Point A.2
.B Point B
.B Point C
Eyecandy isn't necessary. Animation isn't necessary.
You know that. I know that. But J. Random Luser not only doesn't know
that, but doesn't _want_ to know that. And neither does his manager.
"Ohhhhh... shiny!"
You have to keep them awake during your presentation. Pretty pictures and
jazzy background music don’t hurt.
--
Pete
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2020-06-26 18:20:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 10:00:06 -0700
Post by Peter Flass
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Scott Lurndal
troff with the 'mv' macro package is sufficient.
.A This viewgraph is about
.B Point A
.C Point A.1
.C Point A.2
.B Point B
.B Point C
Gets the job done most of the time.
Post by Peter Flass
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by Scott Lurndal
Eyecandy isn't necessary. Animation isn't necessary.
Diagrams sometimes help.
Post by Peter Flass
Post by Charlie Gibbs
You know that. I know that. But J. Random Luser not only doesn't know
that, but doesn't _want_ to know that. And neither does his manager.
"Ohhhhh... shiny!"
I usually walk the (in-house) wiki page for whatever it is I'm
presenting (often shortly after writing it), collapsing and expanding
sections as I go. It works pretty well for overview->deep dive
presentations, handles diagrams well enough and gives them a single
reference to take away that's way more useful than a slide deck that's
already getting stale.
Post by Peter Flass
You have to keep them awake during your presentation. Pretty pictures and
jazzy background music don’t hurt.
Keeping it as short as possible and to the point helps more, nobody
ever fell asleep in one of my presentations and I've never added eye candy
or music.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Thomas Koenig
2020-06-26 18:37:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Keeping it as short as possible and to the point helps more, nobody
ever fell asleep in one of my presentations and I've never added eye candy
or music.
In the company I work in, it is quite normal to present results
in team meetings (or telcos) on PowerPoint, not as a formal
presentation, but as a way of putting down something in writing
and graphs that is reasonably fast to make and to easy understand.
Copy in parts of Excel tables or diagrams or screenshots from CFD
or ... as needed.

This is about as far from a formal presentation as can be while
still using slides.

Certainly no eye candy involved (except for the mandatory corporate
design, where people still use the 4:3 format because it fits
better to content than 16:9, especially if the corporate design
clips off a lot of space on the top and the bottom).
Scott Lurndal
2020-06-26 14:20:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
So what's an actually better and not just different office suite? And
don't say "Open Office" until you can demonstrate Open Office managing
60 APL workspaces each executing on a different core.
Of course 99.9999999999999% of office users (MS or Open/Libre office)
don't need office to manage any APL workspaces. What a silly requirement.
Jorgen Grahn
2020-06-25 06:14:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
There's not a lot of /non-free/ software for Linux (I think) but I can
choose between 57,000 different packages for my Debian system, and
that's only those that someone bothered to package.
Post by Quadibloc
Those who can use Linux generally do so, but unfortunately, most people don't
have much of a choice.
There's probably more people forced to use a smartphone today. If you
have a child in Sweden, you probably have to have one, since the
national authentication software "BankID" is smartphone-only[0], and
you need it to communicate with schools and whatnot.

/Jorgen

[0] Closed source crypto. There was a Linux version for a while, but
it was removed a long time ago. There's a Windows version, but it
appears to be deprecated too.
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
Niklas Karlsson
2020-06-26 10:39:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jorgen Grahn
There's probably more people forced to use a smartphone today. If you
have a child in Sweden, you probably have to have one, since the
national authentication software "BankID" is smartphone-only[0], and
you need it to communicate with schools and whatnot.
/Jorgen
[0] Closed source crypto. There was a Linux version for a while, but
it was removed a long time ago. There's a Windows version, but it
appears to be deprecated too.
Deprecated? Possibly, but still working. I can still authenticate in
Windows with my smartcard reader. Well, I could, until the card recently
expired.

Niklas
--
Dark chocolate and stem ginger--though tasty--are probably sub-optimal
materials for constructing FTL-capable spaceships. --Tanuki
Jorgen Grahn
2020-07-06 04:36:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Niklas Karlsson
Post by Jorgen Grahn
There's probably more people forced to use a smartphone today. If you
have a child in Sweden, you probably have to have one, since the
national authentication software "BankID" is smartphone-only[0], and
you need it to communicate with schools and whatnot.
/Jorgen
[0] Closed source crypto. There was a Linux version for a while, but
it was removed a long time ago. There's a Windows version, but it
appears to be deprecated too.
Deprecated? Possibly, but still working. I can still authenticate in
Windows with my smartcard reader. Well, I could, until the card recently
expired.
I had the impression that the smartphone variant is accepted for more
uses than the variant that needs Windows (or Mac) -- but since I use
neither, I may be wrong. It's true, at least, that the vast majority
of users are on the smartphone variant.

/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
r***@gmail.com
2020-06-25 10:30:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
MAC software is worse.

They repeatedly ask to update software; when I let it go,
it takes ages, as it downloads 100-200MB of program
(apparently the entire package), and then attempts to
install it.

In earlier times, I was given, as a present, itunes
to listen to any music I loaded onto it.

It did not have the package already installed?! Apple
expected you to download it -- all 100Mb of it.
At that time, I was on dial-up, and that process
would have taken several days at 14400 bps.
Post by Quadibloc
There isn't a heck of a lot of third-party software available for either one.
And if you buy a Macintosh, you won't be able to upgrade it except in limited
ways, unless you buy a system costing nearly five figures.
Those who can use Linux generally do so, but unfortunately, most people don't
have much of a choice.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2020-06-25 11:52:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 13:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
You made the choice to use microsoft software. There are alternatives.
There is Linux, and there is the Macintosh.
I've been happy enough these last few decades with FreeBSD - but
then all I want is a unix workstation and the one I have today beats the
pants off anything Sun ever made.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
JimP
2020-06-24 17:17:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 17:30:52 +0100, Gareth Evans
Post by Gareth Evans
Does the arrogance of MicroSnot know no bounds?
Not content with forcing me to have automatic
updates for Windows 10, last night's updates
brought up MicroSnot Edge but without an
option to kill it before entering it, and then
it was shortcutted both onto the desktop as
well as the task bar.
I look forward to the dastardly pile of
bovine excrement that is MicroSnot finally
crashing and burning!
Go to http://www.tenforums.com/

and search for a program called Windows update blocker. Follow the
instructions on that site. Windows will no longer, as long as you
start up this program after you log into your computer's account,
randomly update your computer.
--
Jim
Loading...