Office 10 (aka Office 2002)

[Embattle]

Having read the preview on this I find it hard or a little funny that MS is going to make you registar when you install it via phone or internet otherwise it'll not work after 50 times. Then every year you have to re-registar otherwise it'll disable save & edit functions.

I reckon MS is skating on thin ice since I remember the big problems they had when they tried to make users registar if they wanted to use the update system that WIN95/WIN98 had and I can't see them getting away with this either.

 

[xenon2000]

<useless comment>
Its register not registar
</useless comment>

MS have been skating on thin ice for a while now, I.M.O., always bringing out new products which are "guarenteed not too crash" unless you use them .

I think the registration process largely depends on the cost; but buying it, then installing it, THEN registering for it? That sucks. They're blatantly after money, and are losing poularity against Linux by the moment (do Linux make those sort of packages btw?)

Anyways, thats my 1.33p on the matter.

 

[Guest]

<useless comment>
Its 'guaranteed not to crash' not
guarenteed not too crash
</useless comment>



Anyway, I think that MS are just trying it on. I'd be very surprised if they actually ship the finished product with this protection scheme. It's too much hassle for users , and there's other products just as good (after all, how many iterations of a word processor do people need?).

 

[Wij]

Similar subject:-

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/16157.html

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by xenon2000
They're blatantly after money, and are losing poularity against Linux by the momentB]

Hmm take it your a Linux lover?

While I'm no lover of MS their recent products have been very good in all departments. It also tells you something when an OS and business app happens to cost a lot and yet still have the largest share of the market by a long way.

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by xenon2000
<useless comment>
Its register not registar
</useless comment>

Actually you common scum say register while us Toffs say registar.

Actually a long day and a can't be arsed to check assured I'd get it wrong

 

[Testin da Cable]

<UC>
I'm a linux fan [just so you know]
</UC>

Embattle:
It also tells you something when an OS and business app happens to cost a lot and yet still have the largest share of the market by a long way

Do you also know how the share came to be largest, why the share came to be largest, and even tho it's still the largest why it isn't going to stay the largest? I'm sure that also 'tells you something' doesn't it?

<flamedefence>
Do not misread my comment peeps, I did _not_ just say 'all M$ products must be destroyed in favour of a linux based sollution'. I am one of those people who believe that 'mixed-os' networks are a good thing and that a prudent sysadmin knows and uses the strong points of the systems within his network to maximum advantage.
</flamedefence>

-tdc

 

[stu]

I think you should try reading some other news source than Slashdot...

MS are going to offer the option of buying Office through a "leasing scheme", whereby you pay a yearly license renewal fee, at a reduced price. You will, however, still be able to buy the full 'unlimited' version.

This popped up on Slashdot about a month ago, and in typical style all the Linux evangelists leapt feet first onto the bandwagon claiming how MS were just after money, how this would be their downfall in the face of the growing popularity of Linux and open source, etc etc etc. It's the same old crap we've been hearing for years, and it's still not any more true.

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by testin_da_cable
Do you also know how the share came to be largest, why the share came to be largest, and even tho it's still the largest why it isn't going to stay the largest? I'm sure that also 'tells you something' doesn't it?

YES
YES
UNTRUE
NO

 

[Testin da Cable]

thick

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by testin_da_cable
thick

yes ur, it don't tell me any thing if I don't agree with what you're saying.

 

[bodhi]

The linux taking over the world stories never fail to amuse me. Linux is a pile of over complicated user unfriendly shit. Until they sort these two problems out it will NEVER overtake windows. ever.

 

[old.TUG]

<useless comment (for SoWot >
"It's too much hassle for users , and there's other products just as good"
should be
"It's too much hassle for users, and there are other products just as good"
</useless comment>

!!!!

M$ = monkey shit (and they're just as useful as it too...)

EDIT: Yes I made a cockup or 12

[Edited by TUG on 20-01-01 at 02:00]

 

[Testin da Cable]

Originally posted by Embattle
yes ur, it don't tell me any thing if I don't agree with what you're saying. [/B]

sorry, I disagree. It should tell you something regardless of you agreeing with me or not. If it doesn't, you are either Bodhi or the t* word and I really hope you're not

 

[Embattle]

I don't agree with you on half your points so I could guess but thats really not telling me much since us men think about sex every 6 secomds....so you can imagine what kind of pictures I'm getting here

 

[Embattle]

Getting Smaller Perhaps through diversification they've achieved this, either way it don't look like they've got much to worry about.

 

[Testin da Cable]

quite glad you've engaged in discussion Emb
I shall respond in kind tomorrow when I [hopefully] am less inebriated.
been to a par-tay you see

 

[Wij]

Update from the reg on that link earlier...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/16223.html

Looks real tricky

(I presume they mean regsvr32 rather than regsrv32)

 

[stu]

Originally posted by TUG
M$ = monkey shit (and they're just as useful as it too...)

I take it you use no Microsoft products whatsoever then TUG?

 

[Testin da Cable]

I don't

 

[old.logic7]

It'll never fly. M$ knows that the public will never buy into it. There will be too many people comparing it to "Big Brother" and many will migrate to other office packages.

Linux does have a coupla office suites for it, Star Office being the most visible. <rant> Linux, however, would probably be better off OUT of reach for the average consumer. Winblows is easy to use, that's what the average mindless citizen needs. Linux requires one to think, that's bad for the masses. They would require it to be dumbed down so that they can use it.

That's why there's Windows, MacOS, Workbench, and GEM. Too many people couldn't read a fuckin book to learn how to use DOS or whatever. </rant>

 

[stu]

I used DOS for years. However, I would (and do) pick Windows as my choice of O/S over Linux every time.

Why? DOS made sense. Its commands were intuitive, they were generally abbreviations of the actual action you were trying to do, and was pretty easy to pick up at any level (for a text driven O/S).

Linux, on the other hand, suffers from the fact that it's by nerds, for nerds. Controversial statement maybe, but here is the problem with Linux. Despite the fact that the "open source community" continually eulogises about the day that MS the evil empire will be defeated, and people finally realise the value of Open Source, they actually don't want it to happen. Because if it did, Linux would then be for "lusers", and there'd be nothing 'cool' about using it at all. Everything about Linux screams 'fit in or fuck off' - if you don't agree 100% with the idea that everything MS ever does is bad, Open Source is the only way to go, Linux is the greatest thing in the world ever, then hit the road son, you're not welcome using our Operating System. You might taint it. The Linux community is happy with 'lamers' using Windows, but what it doesn't realise is that in the real world, 99.9% of PC users are people who just want to turn their PC on, have it work straight away, and do what they want to do.

Linux, however, would probably be better off OUT of reach for the average consumer. Winblows is easy to use, that's what the average mindless citizen needs. Linux requires one to think, that's bad for the masses. They would require it to be dumbed down so that they can use it.

And this is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Sorry mate, but I don't want to have to think to turn my computer on. I have to think enough about what I'm actually doing when it's working, let alone spending time arsing around actually getting it working in the first place. Otherwise why am I actually using a computer? Why not just use pen and paper? They're supposed to be there to help you do your job, not to hinder you.

This is probably why the command for formatting a hard disk in DOS is "format", whilst in Linux it's something like "./tar greep flib flob -yrjekl" (an exagerration obviously, but it's something ridiculous). Because while Microsoft just want you to get on and format your hard disk (no doubt so that they can infect it with all their evil software and spy on you continually, and report you to the FBI, etc), Linux wants you to WORK for that format. Hey, if you can't put in the hours pal, why should I? You want me to clean this disk for you? You gonna have to sweat for it my friend.

[Edited by Stu- on 22-01-01 at 14:32]

 

[old.logic7]

No, no, no Stu... Ya got it all wrong. I'm not being some "arrogant" computer nerd or anything like that. I'm merely stating the truth as I see it. I've been using computers since 1980 or so. I've owned quite a few of 'em (Commodore 64, Sinclair ZX81/Timex Sinclair 1000, Apple ][ e, Atari 800xl, Atari 520ST, Atari 1040ST, Amiga 2000HD, and few PC's) and I've seen how their interface has changed. Back in the 8bit days, there were no GUI's. Everything was done from a text prompt, and there were fewer users. Few people wanted to actually learn how to use and program a computer; they all said it was hard. The Apple Lisa and Mac changed that. Nowadays, anyone can use a pc with little knowledge as to how it actually works. Enter Linux: a typical Linux user knows exactly how it works. They can use it from a command line or from a GUI. How many Windows "users" would dare try something from a DOS prompt? Not many these days. If you look at the reported increase of pc usage over the years versus the proliferation and refinement of the GUI you will see the trend that I spoke of: As the pc became easier to use, pc ownership and usage rose. Once it's sufficiently dumbed down, people will buy it. The masses will not buy into something that requires you to work. They don't want that. Linux makes you work, the masses don't want or really need Linux. It's too much for their brains to handle.

1 example of pc's being dumbed down for the masses - The Macintosh and MacOS (pick a version): The designers at Apple recognized that too many people were not waiting until the red disk access light went out to remove their floppies from their drives, thus destroying data on the disk. They developed a way around this: instead of allowing the user to physically remove a disk on his/her own, the OS would tell the pc to eject the disk and a motorized transport would eject the floppy for the user.

All because someone couldn't remember to watch the little red light.

Personally, I use Windows98 and Linux (x86 and PPC). Linux is great for programming and stuff, plus it's networking abilities are sweet. Windows is excellent for games, but that's about it.

 

[Testin da Cable]

Originally posted by Stu-
Why? DOS made sense. Its commands were intuitive, they were generally abbreviations of the actual action you were trying to do, and was pretty easy to pick up at any level (for a text driven O/S).

This is probably why the command for formatting a hard disk in DOS is "format", whilst in Linux it's something like "./tar greep flib flob -yrjekl" (an exagerration obviously, but it's something ridiculous).

I don't find
mkfs <thing to be formatted>
any harder than
format <thing to be formatted>

Think back m8. waaaaaaaaaaaay back. Back to when some m8 of yours installed a thing called windows on your pc for the very first time.
You turned on your pc and looked at it for several minutes as it 'did' some 'stuff'.
By no stretch of my imagination can you get me to believe that suddenly and 'intuitively' you knew every thing there was to know about windows.
You had to learn. And if you want to run linux you will have to learn again. Simple as that. Now, if you do not want to learn but still want to run linux, then you should choose a newbie-friendly distribution. You'll get by. Linux has become friendly enough that you don't need a degree just to install it

Anyway, logic7 is correct when he states that windows and macOS very effectivly hide the system from the user. All good and well. After all, us IT types have heard of the average userland denzin and made products to try to cope with them
However since the average user knows nothing at all about his/her pc it doesn't matter to them what pictogram they click on, just as long as their office app starts or their email or whatever. It matters even less [to them] what os is running, cos they dont know how it works anyway. In fact, a linux based workstation would be [is] ideal in a business environment.

One more thing:

Everything about Linux screams 'fit in or fuck off'

Whoever gave you that idea? That has to be the most silly thing I have ever heard. You should read that line as "If you want to use it, then use it. If you don't want to then don't." however if you say "fit in" when you mean that we try to keep to the standards and RFC's as much as possible 'sted of breaking them then you're absolutly correct.

-tdc

 

[bodhi]

TDC that smacks of the inferiority complex most linux users seem to have. Linux is stable and almost unhackable, granted. But is one reset every 4 days really enough of an annoyance to persuade the average user to go to an OS where starting the GUI up involves typing "sdfjkoepjfpoesjfpes -RN"? Basically what it comes down to, is that most PC users are happy enough with windows, couldnt give a flying fuck ho stable it is as they only turn the PC on to read email, wouldnt know if they were being hacked in the first place, and seeing as they bought the PC with tho OS in the first place, couldnt care less how much it cost to buy?

I tried installing Red Hat once. It crashed 5 times before I gave up. Is this really what your community wants the novice computer user to run into?

/me reminds himself to stop posting when drunk

ah well Tony Hawk's calls

 

[Testin da Cable]

aye Bodhi dun post when ur drunk

anyway what I tried to get across is this:
there are [os] alternatives to choose from when you've become sick to death of [shall we say] 'features' in windows.

tho I like w2k a step in the right direction there imo.

 

[bodhi]

I WILL fill the entire page up with my posts

 

[Testin da Cable]

i'm sure you will

 

[old.TUG]

gah fuckin spammaz

 

[Testin da Cable]

yeah
all dem sp4m0rs posting nonsense