Why people "choose" Windows - Linux

This is a discussion on Why people "choose" Windows - Linux ; Hadron wrote: > There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower, Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu. After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode). > has less features ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 60 of 60

Thread: Why people "choose" Windows

  1. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    Hadron wrote:

    > There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,


    Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu.
    After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).

    > has less features and much buggier. It is also incompatible
    > with many existing documents.


    Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003
    documents to including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works also.

    Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of
    StarOffice, its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore
    It must be inferior, although it is written by the professionals
    at Sun Microsystems.

    Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    Oh yeah, I get it now.

    --
    HPT

  2. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,

    >
    > Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu.
    > After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).


    Took about the same in Mandriva too. Though once it's open, I leave it
    open on another desktop. Oh, of course, Quack isn't used to numerous
    virtual desktops, as the troll only uses windows.

    >> has less features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with many
    >> existing documents.

    >
    > Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003 documents to
    > including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works also.
    >
    > Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of StarOffice,
    > its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore It must be inferior,
    > although it is written by the professionals at Sun Microsystems.
    >
    > Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    > Oh yeah, I get it now.


    Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.

    --
    The little scamps! It's the oldest trick in the book: capture your ship,
    turn it into a planet, then explore a macro universe in a laundry basket.
    How could you fall for an old scam like that?
    --Holly, Nanarchy - Red Dwarf--

  3. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    William Poaster writes:

    > On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,

    >>
    >> Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu.
    >> After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).

    >
    > Took about the same in Mandriva too. Though once it's open, I leave it
    > open on another desktop. Oh, of course, Quack isn't used to numerous
    > virtual desktops, as the troll only uses windows.


    I am now of the conclusion that you are as stupid as I suggested.

    >
    >>> has less features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with many
    >>> existing documents.

    >>
    >> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003 documents to
    >> including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works also.
    >>
    >> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of StarOffice,
    >> its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore It must be inferior,
    >> although it is written by the professionals at Sun Microsystems.
    >>
    >> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    >> Oh yeah, I get it now.

    >
    > Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.


    I did not mention MS. I said Office was better than OO. And it is. I
    also said some OSS, emacs, is better than commercial equivalents. You
    need to grow up Willy and learn how to read.

    --
    - "Actually XP *is* getting press, but most of it is along the lines of
    "we're going to wait and see", in other words not very good."
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

  4. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On 2008-07-02, Richard Rasker wrote:
    > My spouse, a college teacher, has been able to do a lot of work from our own
    > house using her Linux laptop, for years on end. And where her colleagues
    > were plagued by malware and viruses, and regular Windows reinstalls, all of
    > her trouble consisted of adjusting the odd table padding here or margin
    > there in the documents she created and processed with OpenOffice.
    > In short: no problems to speak of in years, and she could merrily download
    > and upload her work and check and send mail through the college's servers.
    >
    > Until today, that is. Now, they've "modernized" the IT system, and as of
    > today, all connections from here fail, with an ominous warning on the login
    > page: "Home and laptop users are required to install the IBM Domino Web
    > Access 7 Control for continued access".
    >
    > Great. So we need to install an ActiveX control to continue to use their
    > Internet services. And, as we all know, ActiveX controls on Web sites are
    > Microsoft's way to give any non-Windows users the middle finger. So we're
    > stuck with a simple choice: get Windows, or give up working from home.
    >
    > This is a perfect example why people "choose" Windows: not because they have
    > a choice, but because they're forced to use it. And oh, who came up with
    > this idea to set up the college's Internet portal this way in the first
    > place? Yup, the Certified Microsoft Gold Partner bastards who sold this
    > crapware to the college.


    I gotta say that you may be misplacing some of the blame here.

    Yes, your spouse's employer is to blame for selecting a solution that uses
    _the_ most insecure web product known to man: ActiveX

    But blaming Microsoft - as much as I'd like to - is not right. IBM is also to
    blame. It is this sort of myopic thinking that got IBM in fiduciary trouble
    a few years back and killed their domination of the desktop market (thank
    God - we don't need a monopoly in computing). Personally, I think you should
    do one of two things:

    1. Install Win98se in VMWare and then install IE 6. (Assuming you have a
    license.
    2. Install Crossover Office and then install IE 6 in that. If the college
    is paying for copies of Notes, then perhaps she should install that
    too. (Notes is only a "Silver" level application though.)
    3. Install IE6 under Wine (never done it and I don't know how well it
    works. I've always just used xover office).

    Either way, I'd definitely be writing a tersely worded letter to the
    I.T. Director and the Dean asking why they're taking a step backwards
    into the world of proprietary software and operating system monoculture
    when tomorrow's systems are all going to be based on open software and
    open protocols and a network built on an heterogenous operating system
    environment.


  5. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    alt writes:

    > On 2008-07-02, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >> My spouse, a college teacher, has been able to do a lot of work from our own
    >> house using her Linux laptop, for years on end. And where her colleagues
    >> were plagued by malware and viruses, and regular Windows reinstalls, all of
    >> her trouble consisted of adjusting the odd table padding here or margin
    >> there in the documents she created and processed with OpenOffice.
    >> In short: no problems to speak of in years, and she could merrily download
    >> and upload her work and check and send mail through the college's servers.
    >>
    >> Until today, that is. Now, they've "modernized" the IT system, and as of
    >> today, all connections from here fail, with an ominous warning on the login
    >> page: "Home and laptop users are required to install the IBM Domino Web
    >> Access 7 Control for continued access".
    >>
    >> Great. So we need to install an ActiveX control to continue to use their
    >> Internet services. And, as we all know, ActiveX controls on Web sites are
    >> Microsoft's way to give any non-Windows users the middle finger. So we're
    >> stuck with a simple choice: get Windows, or give up working from home.
    >>
    >> This is a perfect example why people "choose" Windows: not because they have
    >> a choice, but because they're forced to use it. And oh, who came up with
    >> this idea to set up the college's Internet portal this way in the first
    >> place? Yup, the Certified Microsoft Gold Partner bastards who sold this
    >> crapware to the college.

    >
    > I gotta say that you may be misplacing some of the blame here.
    >
    > Yes, your spouse's employer is to blame for selecting a solution that uses
    > _the_ most insecure web product known to man: ActiveX
    >
    > But blaming Microsoft - as much as I'd like to - is not right. IBM is also to
    > blame. It is this sort of myopic thinking that got IBM in fiduciary trouble
    > a few years back and killed their domination of the desktop market (thank
    > God - we don't need a monopoly in computing). Personally, I think you should
    > do one of two things:
    >
    > 1. Install Win98se in VMWare and then install IE 6. (Assuming you have a
    > license.
    > 2. Install Crossover Office and then install IE 6 in that. If the college
    > is paying for copies of Notes, then perhaps she should install that
    > too. (Notes is only a "Silver" level application though.)
    > 3. Install IE6 under Wine (never done it and I don't know how well it
    > works. I've always just used xover office).
    >
    > Either way, I'd definitely be writing a tersely worded letter to the
    > I.T. Director and the Dean asking why they're taking a step backwards
    > into the world of proprietary software and operating system monoculture
    > when tomorrow's systems are all going to be based on open software and
    > open protocols and a network built on an heterogenous operating system
    > environment.
    >


    And these do not work either?

    http://www.tatanka.com.br/ies4linux/page/Main_Page

    --
    "Don't like Linux.. don't use it. Simple."
    -- Rick in comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.os.windows-xp

  6. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:23:40 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > William Poaster writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,
    >>>
    >>> Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu.
    >>> After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).

    >>
    >> Took about the same in Mandriva too. Though once it's open, I leave it
    >> open on another desktop. Oh, of course, Quack isn't used to numerous
    >> virtual desktops, as the troll only uses windows.

    >
    > I am now of the conclusion that you are as stupid as I suggested.
    >
    >
    >>>> has less features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with many
    >>>> existing documents.
    >>>
    >>> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003 documents to
    >>> including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works also.
    >>>
    >>> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of
    >>> StarOffice, its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore It
    >>> must be inferior, although it is written by the professionals at Sun
    >>> Microsystems.
    >>>
    >>> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    >>> Oh yeah, I get it now.

    >>
    >> Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.

    >
    > I did not mention MS.


    Did you Acme Office?

    > I said Office was better than OO. And it is.


    In your opinion ... for some people... maybe, but your statement is all
    inclusive, so it is incorrect.


    > I
    > also said some OSS, emacs, is better than commercial equivalents. You
    > need to grow up Willy and learn how to read.



    --
    Rick

  7. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    Rick writes:

    > On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:23:40 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> William Poaster writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,
    >>>>
    >>>> Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu.
    >>>> After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).
    >>>
    >>> Took about the same in Mandriva too. Though once it's open, I leave it
    >>> open on another desktop. Oh, of course, Quack isn't used to numerous
    >>> virtual desktops, as the troll only uses windows.

    >>
    >> I am now of the conclusion that you are as stupid as I suggested.
    >>
    >>
    >>>>> has less features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with many
    >>>>> existing documents.
    >>>>
    >>>> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003 documents to
    >>>> including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works also.
    >>>>
    >>>> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of
    >>>> StarOffice, its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore It
    >>>> must be inferior, although it is written by the professionals at Sun
    >>>> Microsystems.
    >>>>
    >>>> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    >>>> Oh yeah, I get it now.
    >>>
    >>> Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.

    >>
    >> I did not mention MS.

    >
    > Did you Acme Office?


    No. I mentioned Office. And emacs.

    >
    >> I said Office was better than OO. And it is.

    >
    > In your opinion ... for some people... maybe, but your statement is all
    > inclusive, so it is incorrect.


    I even gave a little by suggesting if your ONLY criteria is "being free"
    then OO might be.

    Try not to lower yourself further - agreeing with Willy is akin to
    having a lobotomy.

    --
    "Don't like Linux.. don't use it. Simple."
    -- Rick in comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.os.windows-xp

  8. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:58:04 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Rick writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:23:40 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> William Poaster writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu.
    >>>>> After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).
    >>>>
    >>>> Took about the same in Mandriva too. Though once it's open, I leave
    >>>> it open on another desktop. Oh, of course, Quack isn't used to
    >>>> numerous virtual desktops, as the troll only uses windows.
    >>>
    >>> I am now of the conclusion that you are as stupid as I suggested.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>> has less features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with
    >>>>>> many existing documents.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003 documents
    >>>>> to including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works also.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of
    >>>>> StarOffice, its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore It
    >>>>> must be inferior, although it is written by the professionals at Sun
    >>>>> Microsystems.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    >>>>> Oh yeah, I get it now.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.
    >>>
    >>> I did not mention MS.

    >>
    >> Did you Acme Office?

    >
    > No. I mentioned Office. And emacs.


    Well which "Office" did you mean?

    >
    >
    >>> I said Office was better than OO. And it is.

    >>
    >> In your opinion ... for some people... maybe, but your statement is all
    >> inclusive, so it is incorrect.

    >
    > I even gave a little by suggesting if your ONLY criteria is "being free"
    > then OO might be.


    My criteria is not only being free, or Free. Do you know the difference?

    >
    > Try not to lower yourself further - agreeing with Willy is akin to
    > having a lobotomy.


    I tend to think that the criteria of the many cities, states, government
    agencies, companies and users that use OO.o is more than just being free.


    --
    Rick

  9. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:43:49 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > William Poaster writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 08:35:42 +0000, Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 2008-07-05, reporter wrote:
    >>>> When you Linux advocates come up with a office application better than
    >>>> Microsoft Office, everything else will fall into place.
    >>>
    >>> It's only your opinion that MS Office is better than OOffice.

    >
    > *WHAT*??????
    >
    > There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower, has less
    > features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with many existing
    > documents. If you judge it being better since its "free" then fine. But
    > lets be realistic here. Emacs, however, is OSS and *IS* better than any
    > commercial equivalent IMO.


    Considering OpenOffice is free, it is a decent program but it is in no way
    superior to MSOffice.

    My daughter typed a basic paper into OO, saved in DOC (Word97 I think, but
    not sure) and I tried to read it with real MSOffice 2003 and the
    formatting, including footnotes was terribly off.

    That was a pretty basic document as well.

    I wouldn't even attempt this with a complex doc.

    >>>
    >>>> The opportunity is there, because MS Office 2007 has been such a
    >>>> disaster, but unfortunately the Linux community has not banded together
    >>>> to take advantage of it.
    >>>
    >>> Rubbish.

    >
    > Seems quite accurate.
    >
    >>>
    >>>> Instead you keep pointing to Open Office, which the market considers
    >>>> inferior to Microsoft Office.
    >>>
    >>> The "market" doesn't even know that there _is_ an alternative.
    >>>

    >
    > So why was his comment above "Rubbish"? Of course not every one is like
    > the great Gregory Shearman. Some people WANT Linux to get better and
    > installed in more locations.


    The people who want to keep Linux hidden as a niche system are those who
    see their knowledge of Linux, the cli, compiling etc becoming less unique
    and less in demand as others learn about Linux.

    IOW they are no longer the big cheese and feel threatened by this.


    >> Well as an example, Israel does. They threw M$ Office out ages ago.
    >> Brazil changed to Linux, so they'll be using OOo.
    >>
    >>>> Fix the damn thing, and quit blaming MIcrosoft.
    >>>
    >>> Tell ya what... I'll stop blaming Microsoft when they stop making dumb
    >>> changes to their office formats, merely to stymie compatibility with other
    >>> office suites...
    >>>
    >>> There ya go....

    >>
    >> Quite.

    >
    > "me too" eh Willy. Me too.


    The empty suit Willy Poaster rarely has anything useful to say.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  10. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    Rick writes:

    > On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:58:04 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Rick writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:23:40 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> William Poaster writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu.
    >>>>>> After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Took about the same in Mandriva too. Though once it's open, I leave
    >>>>> it open on another desktop. Oh, of course, Quack isn't used to
    >>>>> numerous virtual desktops, as the troll only uses windows.
    >>>>
    >>>> I am now of the conclusion that you are as stupid as I suggested.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> has less features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with
    >>>>>>> many existing documents.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003 documents
    >>>>>> to including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works also.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of
    >>>>>> StarOffice, its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore It
    >>>>>> must be inferior, although it is written by the professionals at Sun
    >>>>>> Microsystems.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    >>>>>> Oh yeah, I get it now.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.
    >>>>
    >>>> I did not mention MS.
    >>>
    >>> Did you Acme Office?

    >>
    >> No. I mentioned Office. And emacs.

    >
    > Well which "Office" did you mean?


    Look Rick - don't try to be clever. It really ill befits you. I said
    "Office". I mean, in the context MS Office. I, however, did not mention
    MS. MS is the company. Office is the product.

    >
    >>
    >>
    >>>> I said Office was better than OO. And it is.
    >>>
    >>> In your opinion ... for some people... maybe, but your statement is all
    >>> inclusive, so it is incorrect.

    >>
    >> I even gave a little by suggesting if your ONLY criteria is "being free"
    >> then OO might be.

    >
    > My criteria is not only being free, or Free. Do you know the difference?
    >


    You should know I do. But what do YOU do with Free SW Rick? In terms of
    contributing I mean. Nothing I dare say.

    >>
    >> Try not to lower yourself further - agreeing with Willy is akin to
    >> having a lobotomy.

    >
    > I tend to think that the criteria of the many cities, states, government
    > agencies, companies and users that use OO.o is more than just being
    > free.


    Sure. And the rest of the world?

    --
    - "Thats what I have been saying for 5 years. Consumers are tired, they
    want something new and more exciting."
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

  11. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    Rick wrote:
    > Hadron wrote:
    >> William Poaster writes:
    >>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is
    >>>>> slower,
    >>>>
    >>>> Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in
    >>>> Ubuntu. After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).
    >>>
    >>> Took about the same in Mandriva too. Though once it's
    >>> open, I leave it open on another desktop. Oh, of course,
    >>> Quack isn't used to numerous virtual desktops, as the
    >>> troll only uses windows.

    >>
    >> I am now of the conclusion that you are as stupid as I
    >> suggested.


    Way to go, "software QA consultant", "Usenet etiquette
    provocateur", "true Linux advocate", "Debian distro governor",
    "kernel hacker", "emacs user", "swapfile expert", "X specialist",
    "CUPS guru", "USB-disk server admin", "defragger professional",
    "newsreader magician", "hardware maven", "time coordinator",
    "email sage" and "OSS culling committee chairman" Hadron Quark,
    aka Hans Schneider, aka Richard, aka Damian O'Leary.

    >>>>> has less features and much buggier. It is also
    >>>>> incompatible with many existing documents.
    >>>>
    >>>> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office
    >>>> 2003 documents to including Word, Excel, PowerPoint.
    >>>> Save as works also.
    >>>>
    >>>> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser
    >>>> version of StarOffice, its commercial variant is
    >>>> considered OSS. Therefore It must be inferior, although
    >>>> it is written by the professionals at Sun Microsystems.
    >>>>
    >>>> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted
    >>>> monopoly. Oh yeah, I get it now.
    >>>
    >>> Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.

    >>
    >> I did not mention MS.


    Implied it:
    >>>>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is
    >>>>> slower,


    It can be none other than his beloved MS Office.

    > Did you Acme Office?
    >
    >> I said Office was better than OO. And it is.

    >
    > In your opinion ... for some people... maybe, but your
    > statement is all inclusive, so it is incorrect.


    As we see, when ever are his statements correct?

    >> I also said some OSS, emacs, is better than commercial
    >> equivalents. You need to grow up Willy and learn how to
    >> read.


    It seems that it is HQ that needs to grow up. Calling people
    stupid for sharing an honest opinion, really.

    As I said, the trolls herein are getting stupider every day.

    --
    HPT

  12. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:23:40 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > William Poaster writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,
    >>>
    >>> Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu.
    >>> After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).

    >>
    >> Took about the same in Mandriva too. Though once it's open, I leave it
    >> open on another desktop. Oh, of course, Quack isn't used to numerous
    >> virtual desktops, as the troll only uses windows.

    >
    > I am now of the conclusion that you are as stupid as I suggested.


    The general consensus of the group is that William Poaster is a gasbag.
    All hot air and no substance.

    >>
    >>>> has less features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with many
    >>>> existing documents.
    >>>
    >>> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003 documents to
    >>> including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works also.
    >>>
    >>> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of StarOffice,
    >>> its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore It must be inferior,
    >>> although it is written by the professionals at Sun Microsystems.
    >>>
    >>> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    >>> Oh yeah, I get it now.

    >>
    >> Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.

    >
    > I did not mention MS. I said Office was better than OO. And it is. I
    > also said some OSS, emacs, is better than commercial equivalents. You
    > need to grow up Willy and learn how to read.


    With the Linux zealot advocate, you are either 100 percent with them or you
    are considered to be against them.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  13. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    "Moshe Goldfarb." stated in post
    pj17pfohg7nv.13ker4hakaz4o.dlg@40tude.net on 7/5/08 8:51 AM:

    > On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:43:49 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> William Poaster writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 08:35:42 +0000, Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 2008-07-05, reporter wrote:
    >>>>> When you Linux advocates come up with a office application better than
    >>>>> Microsoft Office, everything else will fall into place.
    >>>>
    >>>> It's only your opinion that MS Office is better than OOffice.

    >>
    >> *WHAT*??????
    >>
    >> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower, has less
    >> features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with many existing
    >> documents. If you judge it being better since its "free" then fine. But
    >> lets be realistic here. Emacs, however, is OSS and *IS* better than any
    >> commercial equivalent IMO.

    >
    > Considering OpenOffice is free, it is a decent program but it is in no way
    > superior to MSOffice.
    >
    > My daughter typed a basic paper into OO, saved in DOC (Word97 I think, but
    > not sure) and I tried to read it with real MSOffice 2003 and the
    > formatting, including footnotes was terribly off.
    >
    > That was a pretty basic document as well.
    >
    > I wouldn't even attempt this with a complex doc.


    I know for my syllabi, OO.o completely messed them up - useless... to be
    fair so did Apple's Pages program. I ended up re-doing them in Pages... I
    am sure I could have done the same on OO.o.

    ....

    --
    Look, this is silly. It's not an argument, it's an armor plated walrus with
    walnut paneling and an all leather interior.




  14. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 10:12:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:

    > Rick wrote:
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>> William Poaster writes:
    >>>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Just timed it, took 7 seconds for OO Write to come up in Ubuntu.
    >>>>> After closing, took 3 seconds (cached mode).
    >>>>
    >>>> Took about the same in Mandriva too. Though once it's open, I leave it
    >>>> open on another desktop. Oh, of course, Quack isn't used to numerous
    >>>> virtual desktops, as the troll only uses windows.
    >>>
    >>> I am now of the conclusion that you are as stupid as I suggested.

    >
    > Way to go, "software QA consultant", "Usenet etiquette provocateur", "true
    > Linux advocate", "Debian distro governor", "kernel hacker", "emacs user",
    > "swapfile expert", "X specialist", "CUPS guru", "USB-disk server admin",
    > "defragger professional", "newsreader magician", "hardware maven", "time
    > coordinator", "email sage" and "OSS culling committee chairman" Hadron
    > Quark, aka Hans Schneider, aka Richard, aka Damian O'Leary.
    >
    >>>>>> has less features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with
    >>>>>> many existing documents.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003 documents
    >>>>> to including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works also.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of
    >>>>> StarOffice, its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore It
    >>>>> must be inferior, although it is written by the professionals at Sun
    >>>>> Microsystems.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly. Oh
    >>>>> yeah, I get it now.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.
    >>>
    >>> I did not mention MS.

    >
    > Implied it:
    >>>>>> There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower,


    Exactly. The troll doesn't even know wtf it posted!

    > It can be none other than his beloved MS Office.


    Indeed.

    >> Did you Acme Office?
    >>
    >>> I said Office was better than OO. And it is.

    >>
    >> In your opinion ... for some people... maybe, but your statement is all
    >> inclusive, so it is incorrect.

    >
    > As we see, when ever are his statements correct?
    >
    >>> I also said some OSS, emacs, is better than commercial equivalents. You
    >>> need to grow up Willy and learn how to read.

    >
    > It seems that it is HQ that needs to grow up. Calling people stupid for
    > sharing an honest opinion, really.


    Well as that wasn't in the post I replied to, it's Quacj who's the stupid
    one.

    > As I said, the trolls herein are getting stupider every day.


    And Quack is prime example.

    --
    The little scamps! It's the oldest trick in the book: capture your ship,
    turn it into a planet, then explore a macro universe in a laundry basket.
    How could you fall for an old scam like that?
    --Holly, Nanarchy - Red Dwarf--

  15. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On 2008-07-05, Hadron wrote:
    > William Poaster writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 08:35:42 +0000, Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 2008-07-05, reporter wrote:
    >>>> When you Linux advocates come up with a office application better than
    >>>> Microsoft Office, everything else will fall into place.
    >>>
    >>> It's only your opinion that MS Office is better than OOffice.

    >
    > *WHAT*??????
    >
    > There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower, has less


    So what problems you you PERSONALLY have with OO that prevents you
    from using it? Nevermind OO. OO is just the tip of the iceberg. What
    about all the other office suites on Windows that have one or more
    best-of-breed or progenitor apps in them.

    > features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with many existing
    > documents. If you judge it being better since its "free" then fine. But


    So is office itself.

    [deletia]

    --
    Nothing quite gives you an understanding of Oracle's |||
    continued popularity as does an attempt to do some / | \
    simple date manipulations in postgres.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  16. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    On 2008-07-05, Hadron wrote:
    > Rick writes:
    >
    >> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 18:04:00 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Rick writes:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:58:04 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Rick writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:23:40 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> William Poaster writes:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Hadron wrote:

    [deletia]
    >>>>>>>>> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003
    >>>>>>>>> documents to including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works
    >>>>>>>>> also.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of
    >>>>>>>>> StarOffice, its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore
    >>>>>>>>> It must be inferior, although it is written by the professionals
    >>>>>>>>> at Sun Microsystems.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    >>>>>>>>> Oh yeah, I get it now.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I did not mention MS.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Did you Acme Office?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> No. I mentioned Office. And emacs.
    >>>>
    >>>> Well which "Office" did you mean?
    >>>
    >>> Look Rick - don't try to be clever. It really ill befits you. I said
    >>> "Office". I mean, in the context MS Office. I, however, did not mention
    >>> MS. MS is the company. Office is the product.

    >>
    >> ... hence "defending his beloved M$ yet again".
    >>

    >
    > You really are a f*cking twit at times. I am not defending MS. I am
    > categorically stating that Open Office is not in the same league as MS
    > Office. MS do indeed produce some good SW. Consider it not as much


    ....and that's all you've got: a bald assertion.

    That's all anyone has ever really had against any office app not
    from Microsoft regardless of the platform. It's the same old FUD
    recycled over and over again since the dawn of the hegemony.

    [deletia]

    --
    Nothing quite gives you an understanding of Oracle's |||
    continued popularity as does an attempt to do some / | \
    simple date manipulations in postgres.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  17. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:28:28 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

    > On 2008-07-05, Hadron wrote:
    >> Rick writes:
    >>
    >>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 18:04:00 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Rick writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:58:04 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Rick writes:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:23:40 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> William Poaster writes:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Hadron wrote:

    > [deletia]
    >>>>>>>>>> Many? So far has opened all of the Microsoft Office 2003
    >>>>>>>>>> documents to including Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Save as works
    >>>>>>>>>> also.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Oh, I get it. Because OpenOffice, the free lesser version of
    >>>>>>>>>> StarOffice, its commercial variant is considered OSS. Therefore
    >>>>>>>>>> It must be inferior, although it is written by the professionals
    >>>>>>>>>> at Sun Microsystems.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Use of it takes away installed base from the convicted monopoly.
    >>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah, I get it now.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Yes, it seems Quack is defending his beloved M$ yet again.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I did not mention MS.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Did you Acme Office?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> No. I mentioned Office. And emacs.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Well which "Office" did you mean?
    >>>>
    >>>> Look Rick - don't try to be clever. It really ill befits you. I said
    >>>> "Office". I mean, in the context MS Office. I, however, did not
    >>>> mention MS. MS is the company. Office is the product.
    >>>
    >>> ... hence "defending his beloved M$ yet again".
    >>>
    >>>

    >> You really are a f*cking twit at times. I am not defending MS. I am
    >> categorically stating that Open Office is not in the same league as MS
    >> Office. MS do indeed produce some good SW. Consider it not as much

    >
    > ...and that's all you've got: a bald assertion.
    >
    > That's all anyone has ever really had against any office app not from
    > Microsoft regardless of the platform. It's the same old FUD recycled over
    > and over again since the dawn of the hegemony.
    >
    > [deletia]


    Funny how Quack doesn't like it when someone twists *his* words, yet it's
    ok for the troll to twist & make up what others have said?

    As for him dengrating Linux & defending M$:


    So you think it's tougher for Free (as in beer) SW to replace MS SW? It
    doesn't replace the MS stuff generally because the "free" application SW
    is piss poor in relation to the purchased versions.

    From: Hadron
    Message-ID:
    Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007


    There is a certain amount of hostility towards Linux in most of your
    posts. Your statement above is one prime example. Google can reveal plenty
    others. Even a blind person reading this newsgroup could pretty quickly
    figure out that you do appear to favor MS...hence why question why do you
    bother with linux?

    From: Stephan Rose
    Message-ID:
    Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.ubuntu
    Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008

    As some have said, as Quack constantly whines & bitches about the OS, why
    does the troll pretend to use Linux..

    --
    The little scamps! It's the oldest trick in the book: capture your ship,
    turn it into a planet, then explore a macro universe in a laundry basket.
    How could you fall for an old scam like that?
    --Holly, Nanarchy - Red Dwarf--

  18. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    High Plains Thumper wrote:

    > OSS culling committee chairman


    LOL
    --
    Regards,
    [tv]

    ....==/==/==/==Police tagline==/==/==Do not cross ==/==/==/==

    Owner/Proprietor, Cheesus Crust Pizza Company
    Good to the last supper

  19. Re: Why Hadron "choose" Windows

    Hadron lied:

    > I am not defending MS.


    Bull****, you lying sack of mucous.
    --
    Regards,
    [tv]

    ....==/==/==/==Police tagline==/==/==Do not cross ==/==/==/==

    Owner/Proprietor, Cheesus Crust Pizza Company
    Good to the last supper

  20. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    reporter wrote:

    >Fix the damn thing


    *plonk*

    Fixed.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3