Oops... - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Oops... - Ubuntu ; "Christopher Hunter" wrote in message news:Zb4Cj.31665$nw4.13347@fe1.news.blueyonder.co. uk... > dennis@home wrote: > >> Making rash assumptions there I see.. closed source but you know its >> sloppy and non standard. > > /I/ can tell you that it is - much ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 116

Thread: Oops...

  1. Re: Oops...



    "Christopher Hunter" wrote in message
    news:Zb4Cj.31665$nw4.13347@fe1.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >> Making rash assumptions there I see.. closed source but you know its
    >> sloppy and non standard.

    >
    > /I/ can tell you that it is - much of the code is kludged together to
    > "get /something/ working" without regard to efficiency, stability or
    > security. The poor MS drones just have to "get /something/ out of the
    > door"...
    >
    >> A lot of open source is sloppy as can be seen from the code ( I suppose
    >> you could fix it if you wanted to).

    >
    > /That's/ the *big* difference!


    OK prove it.. I will choose a project that's sloppy and you can demonstrate
    that it is easy to clean up.
    Then you will have some validity to what you claim.
    This whole the source is available only works if there are people who can
    and want to understand and modify the code. This means none in real terms as
    nobody is going to spend more than a few minutes looking at a piece of
    sloppy code before using something else, even if its windows. Just look at
    the number of dead/useless open source projects there are where nobody can
    be bothered to fix them. If it were easy there would be none.
    Face facts.. apart from a few high profile projects most open source stuff
    is cr@p, badly written just to do a quick bodge for a user who then thinks
    wouldn't this be great for everyone else.. lets release it.

    Oh as for the sloppy project.. how about the Ubuntu installer.. it creates
    windows that you can't see the buttons on on all the Intel 845 chipset
    notebooks I have seen. Not a display resolution problem as they are running
    in 800x600 which should be enough, just a bug. I will make it easier for you
    too.. it didn't do that in 7.04 so you can look in the source code change
    log to see what change is causing it.

    >
    > C.



  2. Re: Oops...



    "Christopher Hunter" wrote in message
    news:xf4Cj.31669$nw4.9478@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >> It is well known that M$ went through a phase of making the code
    >> better managed and better written a few years back.

    >
    > Complete and utter nonsense. Even Vista uses the 1991 NT kernel. It's an
    > inviolate binary blob that nobody has a clue about - it was never properly
    > documented, and any attempted changes result in disaster. MS /still/
    > don't
    > have anybody capable of writing a new kernel. Reliable rumours have it
    > that they're /buying/ a version of "Mach" for Windows 7!


    You are talking cr@p as usual. Vista SP1 uses the same kernel as win2008 and
    not the NT kernel at all.
    Even pre SP1 it uses a highly modified kernel with different scheduling.
    Are you going to repeat you usual one about Vista using the really old
    stolen TCP stack? You know the one that M$ can't change as they don't know
    how. The one that supports IPv6 even though it wasn't invented when you
    claim they stole the stack.
    You keep repeating the same lies.. do you think anyone that matters believes
    you?


  3. Re: Oops...

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    > message news:z54Cj.6$M9.2@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    >> dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Robin T Cox" wrote in message
    >>> news:LLzBj.21265$ki.14639@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> In the near future, despite their past familiarity with Windows, people
    >>>> are going to find that they can no longer buy Windows on a new computer
    >>>> unless they buy Vista on high-end hardware.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Guess what will happen.. they will buy Vista on high end hardware, who
    >>> knows it may even run the games they buy?

    >>
    >> It mostly doesn't.
    >>
    >>> The other likely scenario is that they will keep the XP machine they
    >>> have as it probably does what they want.

    >>
    >> Probably, for a while, until some virus or other malware makes it
    >> unusable.
    >>
    >>> I didn't go out and buy Vista BTW, it came as an insurance replacement
    >>> for
    >>> a machine I broke.

    >>
    >> Hard luck.
    >>
    >>> However vista is nowhere near as bad as none stop and
    >>> some of the other trolls make out, its just different, not very
    >>> different but enough for the trolls to have fun.

    >>
    >> It's appalling! It's hideously slow, on even the fastest hardware,
    >> it /deliberately/ cripples video and audio playback, and has so many
    >> security failings that it is too risky to connect to the 'net...

    >
    > So you claim, but as you are always wrong I think we can ignore that.
    > I bet you haven't even run vista on a decent machine let alone a good one.


    Since when will a "decent machine" bypass the security issues windows still
    has? Since when will it make the crippling of capabilities done by the
    idiotic DRM schemes go away?

    You can claim all sorts of bull****, but you know as well that the DRM in
    Vista exists, and that it will hamper the machines capabilities.
    You know as well as anybody else that Vistas "security" is a riot and just a
    tiny little bit better than XPs "security", which shines by its complete
    absence

    You know as well as anybody else that playing a video will severely throttle
    network throughput.

    So instead of calling someone "always wrong" to bypass his arguments, you
    better start addressing the issues. But you will not, as you are simply a
    lying Vista fanboi.

    *You* are the one who can be safely ignored, as you completely fail honesty.
    Additionally, you are no linux user and still post your bull**** in a linux
    group

    < snip more MD5-dennis lunacy >
    --
    Microsoft? Is that some kind of a toilet paper?


  4. Re: Oops...

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    > message news:Zb4Cj.31665$nw4.13347@fe1.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
    >> dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>> Making rash assumptions there I see.. closed source but you know its
    >>> sloppy and non standard.

    >>
    >> /I/ can tell you that it is - much of the code is kludged together to
    >> "get /something/ working" without regard to efficiency, stability or
    >> security. The poor MS drones just have to "get /something/ out of the
    >> door"...
    >>
    >>> A lot of open source is sloppy as can be seen from the code ( I suppose
    >>> you could fix it if you wanted to).

    >>
    >> /That's/ the *big* difference!

    >
    > OK prove it.. I will choose a project that's sloppy and you can
    > demonstrate that it is easy to clean up.


    Moving the goalposts lots lately, MD5-dennis?

    No matter how sloppy the project is, it is still infinately easier to fix
    for him than any MS-code. Because he can't fix those at all, being closed
    source

    < snip more MD5-dennis idiocy >
    --
    The Day Microsoft makes something that does not suck is probably
    the day they start making vacuum cleaners.


  5. Re: Oops...

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    > message news:xf4Cj.31669$nw4.9478@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
    >> dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>> It is well known that M$ went through a phase of making the code
    >>> better managed and better written a few years back.

    >>
    >> Complete and utter nonsense. Even Vista uses the 1991 NT kernel. It's
    >> an inviolate binary blob that nobody has a clue about - it was never
    >> properly
    >> documented, and any attempted changes result in disaster. MS /still/
    >> don't
    >> have anybody capable of writing a new kernel. Reliable rumours have it
    >> that they're /buying/ a version of "Mach" for Windows 7!

    >
    > You are talking cr@p as usual. Vista SP1 uses the same kernel as win2008
    > and not the NT kernel at all.
    > Even pre SP1 it uses a highly modified kernel with different scheduling.


    Yes. The one which is sooo good that it can't even play a video *and* have
    decent networking concurrently.
    A fine demonstration of the complete incompetence of MS

    < snip more MD5-dennis bull**** >
    --
    This problem was sponsored by Microsoft


  6. Re: Oops...

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >> message news:z54Cj.6$M9.2@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    >>> dennis@home wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Robin T Cox" wrote in message
    >>>> news:LLzBj.21265$ki.14639@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> In the near future, despite their past familiarity with Windows, people
    >>>>> are going to find that they can no longer buy Windows on a new computer
    >>>>> unless they buy Vista on high-end hardware.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Guess what will happen.. they will buy Vista on high end hardware, who
    >>>> knows it may even run the games they buy?
    >>>
    >>> It mostly doesn't.
    >>>
    >>>> The other likely scenario is that they will keep the XP machine they
    >>>> have as it probably does what they want.
    >>>
    >>> Probably, for a while, until some virus or other malware makes it
    >>> unusable.
    >>>
    >>>> I didn't go out and buy Vista BTW, it came as an insurance replacement
    >>>> for
    >>>> a machine I broke.
    >>>
    >>> Hard luck.
    >>>
    >>>> However vista is nowhere near as bad as none stop and
    >>>> some of the other trolls make out, its just different, not very
    >>>> different but enough for the trolls to have fun.
    >>>
    >>> It's appalling! It's hideously slow, on even the fastest hardware,
    >>> it /deliberately/ cripples video and audio playback, and has so many
    >>> security failings that it is too risky to connect to the 'net...

    >>
    >> So you claim, but as you are always wrong I think we can ignore that.
    >> I bet you haven't even run vista on a decent machine let alone a good one.

    >
    > Since when will a "decent machine" bypass the security issues windows still
    > has? Since when will it make the crippling of capabilities done by the
    > idiotic DRM schemes go away?
    >
    > You can claim all sorts of bull****, but you know as well that the DRM in
    > Vista exists, and that it will hamper the machines capabilities.
    > You know as well as anybody else that Vistas "security" is a riot and just a
    > tiny little bit better than XPs "security", which shines by its complete
    > absence
    >
    > You know as well as anybody else that playing a video will severely throttle
    > network throughput.
    >
    > So instead of calling someone "always wrong" to bypass his arguments, you
    > better start addressing the issues. But you will not, as you are simply a
    > lying Vista fanboi.
    >
    > *You* are the one who can be safely ignored, as you completely fail honesty.
    > Additionally, you are no linux user and still post your bull**** in a linux
    > group


    There's also this: "They Criticized Vista. And They Should Know." And these are
    M$ senior executives!
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/business/09digi.html


    --
    Free-BSD 7.0, PC-BSD 1.5
    Linux systems: PCLOS 2007,Fedora 8, Kubuntu 7.10.
    Testing: Mandrake One 2008.1 RC1
    -- On 64bit systems --

  7. Re: Oops...

    On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    >
    > Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    > compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't use
    > office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no where
    > near the same quality as Office.


    Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".

    Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    need.

    I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious and
    the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in either
    office suite I have no need for the database crap.

    Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.

    So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    compare the two things I use:

    I need to write a letter? No problem, I can write all the letters I want
    with OO. I don't even have a problem opening MS Office documents, the
    new docx from 2008 included. Opens perfectly fine.

    I need to do a spreadsheet to calculate something? No problems either.

    So WTF else do you want it to do? Cook your food, clean your house, wash
    the car and suck your dick?

    I mean seriously....

    --
    Stephan
    1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

    君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
    君の事忘れたときがないから

  8. Re: Oops...

    Stephan Rose writes:

    > On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    >> compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't use
    >> office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no where
    >> near the same quality as Office.

    >
    > Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    > tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".


    it isn't. *shrug. Its not a religious thing for me.

    >
    > Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    > need.


    Good for you. Seriously.

    >
    > I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious
    > and


    Aha.

    > the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in either
    > office suite I have no need for the database crap.


    You have no need. OK. Fine. At least we get a better picture of YOUR needs.

    >
    > Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    > for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.


    So thats presentations off too .... Good.

    >
    > So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    > compare the two things I use:


    Irrelevant to you eh? Good ....

    >
    > I need to write a letter? No problem, I can write all the letters I want
    > with OO. I don't even have a problem opening MS Office documents, the
    > new docx from 2008 included. Opens perfectly fine.


    But is not 100% compatible. There are issues.

    >
    > I need to do a spreadsheet to calculate something? No problems
    > either.


    Good for you.

    >
    > So WTF else do you want it to do? Cook your food, clean your house, wash
    > the car and suck your dick?
    >
    > I mean seriously....


    You seem to be a crazy. Go take some meds.

    You already cut out half of what Office does. You ONLY talk about your
    miniscule needs.

    You clearly have no idea of what a lot of businesses use Office for.

  9. Re: Oops...

    Hadron wrote:

    > Stephan Rose writes:
    >
    >> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    >>> compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't use
    >>> office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no where
    >>> near the same quality as Office.

    >>
    >> Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    >> tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".

    >
    > it isn't. *shrug. Its not a religious thing for me.
    >
    >>
    >> Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    >> need.

    >
    > Good for you. Seriously.
    >
    >>
    >> I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious
    >> and

    >
    > Aha.
    >
    >> the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in either
    >> office suite I have no need for the database crap.

    >
    > You have no need. OK. Fine. At least we get a better picture of YOUR
    > needs.
    >
    >>
    >> Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    >> for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.

    >
    > So thats presentations off too .... Good.
    >
    >>
    >> So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    >> compare the two things I use:

    >
    > Irrelevant to you eh? Good ....
    >
    >>
    >> I need to write a letter? No problem, I can write all the letters I want
    >> with OO. I don't even have a problem opening MS Office documents, the
    >> new docx from 2008 included. Opens perfectly fine.

    >
    > But is not 100% compatible. There are issues.
    >
    >>
    >> I need to do a spreadsheet to calculate something? No problems
    >> either.

    >
    > Good for you.
    >
    >>
    >> So WTF else do you want it to do? Cook your food, clean your house, wash
    >> the car and suck your dick?
    >>
    >> I mean seriously....

    >
    > You seem to be a crazy. Go take some meds.
    >
    > You already cut out half of what Office does. You ONLY talk about your
    > miniscule needs.
    >
    > You clearly have no idea of what a lot of businesses use Office for.


    Look, ****-for-brains, you were responding to ME and my need to write a
    simple letter and that I said OO was sufficient. Now, in your typical
    Hardon style, you're arguing that MS Office is needed because it can do so
    much more. You sure do like to twist and turn. Anything to defend
    Microsoft. That's what you're essentially here to do.

    Cheers.

    --
    The world can't afford the rich.

    Q: What OS is built for lusers?
    A: Which one requires running lusermgr.msc to create them?

    Francis (Frank) adds a new "gadget" to his Vista box ...
    Download it here: http://tinyurl.com/2hnof6



  10. Re: Oops...

    NoStop wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Stephan Rose writes:
    >>
    >>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    >>>> compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't use
    >>>> office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no where
    >>>> near the same quality as Office.
    >>>
    >>> Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    >>> tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".

    >>
    >> it isn't. *shrug. Its not a religious thing for me.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    >>> need.

    >>
    >> Good for you. Seriously.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious
    >>> and

    >>
    >> Aha.
    >>
    >>> the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in either
    >>> office suite I have no need for the database crap.

    >>
    >> You have no need. OK. Fine. At least we get a better picture of YOUR
    >> needs.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    >>> for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.

    >>
    >> So thats presentations off too .... Good.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    >>> compare the two things I use:

    >>
    >> Irrelevant to you eh? Good ....
    >>
    >>>
    >>> I need to write a letter? No problem, I can write all the letters I want
    >>> with OO. I don't even have a problem opening MS Office documents, the
    >>> new docx from 2008 included. Opens perfectly fine.

    >>
    >> But is not 100% compatible. There are issues.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> I need to do a spreadsheet to calculate something? No problems
    >>> either.

    >>
    >> Good for you.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> So WTF else do you want it to do? Cook your food, clean your house, wash
    >>> the car and suck your dick?
    >>>
    >>> I mean seriously....

    >>
    >> You seem to be a crazy. Go take some meds.
    >>
    >> You already cut out half of what Office does. You ONLY talk about your
    >> miniscule needs.
    >>
    >> You clearly have no idea of what a lot of businesses use Office for.

    >
    > Look, ****-for-brains, you were responding to ME and my need to write a
    > simple letter and that I said OO was sufficient. Now, in your typical
    > Hardon style, you're arguing that MS Office is needed because it can do so
    > much more. You sure do like to twist and turn. Anything to defend
    > Microsoft. That's what you're essentially here to do.


    Well I wonder what the state of Israel use Office for, because all their
    government offices changed to OpenOffice a few years ago. I would imagine they
    have a *very* broad range of uses for for it.

    But as you say, all Quack does is promote M$ whenever he can.

    Oh, & according to Quack, his OO.o version crashes hourly.

    --
    Free-BSD 7.0, PC-BSD 1.4
    Linux systems: PCLOS 2007,Fedora 8, Kubuntu 7.10.
    Testing: Mandrake One 2008.1 RC1
    -- On 64bit systems --

  11. Re: Oops...

    Stephan Rose wrote:

    > On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    >>compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't use
    >>office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no where
    >>near the same quality as Office.

    >
    >
    > Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    > tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".


    It isn't...so stop whining!
    >
    > Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    > need.


    Simple letters, yes. Try something with a macro.
    >
    > I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious and
    > the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in either
    > office suite I have no need for the database crap.
    >
    > Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    > for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.
    >
    > So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    > compare the two things I use:
    >
    > I need to write a letter? No problem, I can write all the letters I want
    > with OO. I don't even have a problem opening MS Office documents, the
    > new docx from 2008 included. Opens perfectly fine.
    >
    > I need to do a spreadsheet to calculate something? No problems either.
    >
    > So WTF else do you want it to do? Cook your food, clean your house, wash
    > the car and suck your dick?
    >
    > I mean seriously....


    Sorry stephen, maybe for simple letter writing oo is ok. But try running
    a business, exchanging files with others and you'll quickly find out
    that "comparable/compatible" is not the same as the real thing, MS
    Office Suite.
    Frank


  12. Re: Oops...

    On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:50:42 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > Stephan Rose writes:
    >
    >> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    >>> compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't
    >>> use office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no
    >>> where near the same quality as Office.

    >>
    >> Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    >> tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".

    >
    > it isn't. *shrug. Its not a religious thing for me.
    >
    >
    >> Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    >> need.

    >
    > Good for you. Seriously.
    >
    >
    >> I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious and

    >
    > Aha.
    >
    >> the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in
    >> either office suite I have no need for the database crap.

    >
    > You have no need. OK. Fine. At least we get a better picture of YOUR
    > needs.


    Yea, I use proper databases and not some halfassed "solution".

    >
    >
    >> Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    >> for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.

    >
    > So thats presentations off too .... Good.
    >
    >
    >> So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    >> compare the two things I use:

    >
    > Irrelevant to you eh? Good ....


    Well I can't make a fair comparison to components I do not use, now can I?

    >
    >
    >> I need to write a letter? No problem, I can write all the letters I
    >> want with OO. I don't even have a problem opening MS Office documents,
    >> the new docx from 2008 included. Opens perfectly fine.

    >
    > But is not 100% compatible. There are issues.


    I get a document. I open it. I can read it. I'm happy.

    The *only* thing that will EVER guarantee 100% compatibility is opening a
    document in the same application it was created with. ****, Microsoft
    can't even guarantee compatibility across their own line of office
    products and different versions thereof. Why the hell are you giving OO a
    hard time if not even your beloved Microsoft can do it?

    >
    >
    >> I need to do a spreadsheet to calculate something? No problems either.

    >
    > Good for you.


    Quite.

    >
    >
    >> So WTF else do you want it to do? Cook your food, clean your house,
    >> wash the car and suck your dick?
    >>
    >> I mean seriously....

    >
    > You seem to be a crazy. Go take some meds.


    Feeling very well and sane actually. No need for meds.

    >
    > You already cut out half of what Office does. You ONLY talk about your
    > miniscule needs.
    >
    > You clearly have no idea of what a lot of businesses use Office for.


    Actually there isn't a thing in *any* of the businesses that I work with
    that they do that OO couldn't do. There just simply isn't.

    But please, do name something that MS Office does that EVERY business
    (except for the ones I work with apparently) needs that OO doesn't do.
    Please name it...I'd love to know.

    --
    Stephan
    1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

    君の事思い出す日なんてないのは
    君の事忘れたときがないから

  13. Re: Oops...


    "Stephan Rose" wrote in message
    news:ULGdnQTqfLudvETanZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@giganews.com ...
    > On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    >> compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't use
    >> office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no where
    >> near the same quality as Office.

    >
    > Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    > tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".
    >
    > Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    > need.
    >
    > I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious and
    > the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in either
    > office suite I have no need for the database crap.
    >
    > Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    > for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.
    >
    > So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    > compare the two things I use:
    >
    > I need to write a letter? No problem, I can write all the letters I want
    > with OO. I don't even have a problem opening MS Office documents, the
    > new docx from 2008 included. Opens perfectly fine.
    >
    > I need to do a spreadsheet to calculate something? No problems either.
    >
    > So WTF else do you want it to do? Cook your food, clean your house, wash
    > the car and suck your dick?
    >
    > I mean seriously....
    >
    > --
    > Stephan
    > 1986 Pontiac Fiero GT
    >

    Well , let's see. OO is a suite and you dismissed half of it. You obviously
    don't want it to do much for you.
    Real good recommendation. If you're tired of hearing that OO isn't as good
    as Office who cares. You're abigger whiner than he is.



  14. Re: Oops...



    "PeterKhlmann" wrote in message
    news:frasb2$kfa$03$3@news.t-online.com...
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >> message news:xf4Cj.31669$nw4.9478@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
    >>> dennis@home wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> It is well known that M$ went through a phase of making the code
    >>>> better managed and better written a few years back.
    >>>
    >>> Complete and utter nonsense. Even Vista uses the 1991 NT kernel. It's
    >>> an inviolate binary blob that nobody has a clue about - it was never
    >>> properly
    >>> documented, and any attempted changes result in disaster. MS /still/
    >>> don't
    >>> have anybody capable of writing a new kernel. Reliable rumours have it
    >>> that they're /buying/ a version of "Mach" for Windows 7!

    >>
    >> You are talking cr@p as usual. Vista SP1 uses the same kernel as win2008
    >> and not the NT kernel at all.
    >> Even pre SP1 it uses a highly modified kernel with different scheduling.

    >
    > Yes. The one which is sooo good that it can't even play a video *and* have
    > decent networking concurrently.
    > A fine demonstration of the complete incompetence of MS


    Well mine streams HDTV so its your incompetence that is causing the
    problems.
    Ever thought of getting a job in burger king or is that also too hard for
    you?




  15. Re: Oops...


    "Stephan Rose" wrote in message
    news:FJCdnZWButZjyETanZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@giganews.com ...
    > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:50:42 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Stephan Rose writes:
    >>
    >>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    >>>> compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't
    >>>> use office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no
    >>>> where near the same quality as Office.
    >>>
    >>> Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    >>> tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".

    >>
    >> it isn't. *shrug. Its not a religious thing for me.
    >>
    >>
    >>> Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    >>> need.

    >>
    >> Good for you. Seriously.
    >>
    >>
    >>> I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious and

    >>
    >> Aha.
    >>
    >>> the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in
    >>> either office suite I have no need for the database crap.

    >>
    >> You have no need. OK. Fine. At least we get a better picture of YOUR
    >> needs.

    >
    > Yea, I use proper databases and not some halfassed "solution".
    >
    >>
    >>
    >>> Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    >>> for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.

    >>
    >> So thats presentations off too .... Good.
    >>
    >>
    >>> So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    >>> compare the two things I use:

    >>
    >> Irrelevant to you eh? Good ....

    >
    > Well I can't make a fair comparison to components I do not use, now can I?
    >


    Then why are you trying to compare OO's suite to Office's suite? If you
    don't use or know a
    anything about a product how can you sit there and compare them.



  16. Re: Oops...



    "PeterKhlmann" wrote in message
    news:fras1l$kfa$03$1@news.t-online.com...
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >> message news:z54Cj.6$M9.2@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    >>> dennis@home wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Robin T Cox" wrote in message
    >>>> news:LLzBj.21265$ki.14639@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> In the near future, despite their past familiarity with Windows,
    >>>>> people
    >>>>> are going to find that they can no longer buy Windows on a new
    >>>>> computer
    >>>>> unless they buy Vista on high-end hardware.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Guess what will happen.. they will buy Vista on high end hardware, who
    >>>> knows it may even run the games they buy?
    >>>
    >>> It mostly doesn't.
    >>>
    >>>> The other likely scenario is that they will keep the XP machine they
    >>>> have as it probably does what they want.
    >>>
    >>> Probably, for a while, until some virus or other malware makes it
    >>> unusable.
    >>>
    >>>> I didn't go out and buy Vista BTW, it came as an insurance replacement
    >>>> for
    >>>> a machine I broke.
    >>>
    >>> Hard luck.
    >>>
    >>>> However vista is nowhere near as bad as none stop and
    >>>> some of the other trolls make out, its just different, not very
    >>>> different but enough for the trolls to have fun.
    >>>
    >>> It's appalling! It's hideously slow, on even the fastest hardware,
    >>> it /deliberately/ cripples video and audio playback, and has so many
    >>> security failings that it is too risky to connect to the 'net...

    >>
    >> So you claim, but as you are always wrong I think we can ignore that.
    >> I bet you haven't even run vista on a decent machine let alone a good
    >> one.

    >
    > Since when will a "decent machine" bypass the security issues windows
    > still
    > has? Since when will it make the crippling of capabilities done by the
    > idiotic DRM schemes go away?
    >
    > You can claim all sorts of bull****, but you know as well that the DRM in
    > Vista exists, and that it will hamper the machines capabilities.
    > You know as well as anybody else that Vistas "security" is a riot and just
    > a
    > tiny little bit better than XPs "security", which shines by its complete
    > absence
    >
    > You know as well as anybody else that playing a video will severely
    > throttle
    > network throughput.
    >
    > So instead of calling someone "always wrong" to bypass his arguments, you
    > better start addressing the issues. But you will not, as you are simply a
    > lying Vista fanboi.


    You are the liar and the one who calls anyone that has a working windows
    wrong.
    I have a working windows as do millions of others but you are too stupid to
    accept that.
    I guess until you do and stop saying I can't have a working windows even
    though I am using it now I will be correct in saying you are always wrong.

    >
    > *You* are the one who can be safely ignored, as you completely fail
    > honesty.
    > Additionally, you are no linux user and still post your bull**** in a
    > linux
    > group


    Just because I know more about linux and windows than you upsets you, shame
    really.
    It doesn't mean much to anyone else as you know nothing anyway so its hardly
    difficult to know more than you.


  17. Re: Oops...



    "Stephan Rose" wrote in message
    news:ULGdnQTqfLudvETanZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@giganews.com ...
    > On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    >> compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't use
    >> office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no where
    >> near the same quality as Office.

    >
    > Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    > tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".
    >
    > Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    > need.


    I agree as it happens, OO is a lot better now than it was.
    If I didn't have M$ office I would use OO.
    I wouldn't throw M$ office away just to use OO as I am more used to M$.
    I have certainly advised people to download and use OO and will continue to
    do so.

    >
    > I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious and
    > the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in either
    > office suite I have no need for the database crap.


    I use SQL server myself, works quite well and is free.

    >
    > Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    > for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.
    >
    > So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    > compare the two things I use:
    >
    > I need to write a letter? No problem, I can write all the letters I want
    > with OO. I don't even have a problem opening MS Office documents, the
    > new docx from 2008 included. Opens perfectly fine.
    >
    > I need to do a spreadsheet to calculate something? No problems either.
    >
    > So WTF else do you want it to do? Cook your food, clean your house, wash
    > the car and suck your dick?
    >
    > I mean seriously....


    Run macros?




  18. Re: Oops...

    Stephan Rose writes:

    > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:50:42 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Stephan Rose writes:
    >>
    >>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:27:51 +0100, Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Because OO is a bit of a dog in my experience. And it is not 100%
    >>>> compatible. It makes a good go of it, but there are issues. I don't
    >>>> use office any more myself, but lets fact facts, Open Office is no
    >>>> where near the same quality as Office.
    >>>
    >>> Ok WTF do you want OO to do for you for crying out loud? I'm sick and
    >>> tired of hearing this whole "OO isn't the same quality as Office".

    >>
    >> it isn't. *shrug. Its not a religious thing for me.
    >>
    >>
    >>> Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't do that I
    >>> need.

    >>
    >> Good for you. Seriously.
    >>
    >>
    >>> I'm not going to comment on Database as MS Access is just atrocious and

    >>
    >> Aha.
    >>
    >>> the only database I'm willing to work with anyway is MySQL. So in
    >>> either office suite I have no need for the database crap.

    >>
    >> You have no need. OK. Fine. At least we get a better picture of YOUR
    >> needs.

    >
    > Yea, I use proper databases and not some halfassed "solution".


    What half assed solution. Oh no! You're not trying to show off that you
    use an RDBMS are you? Not when something like access will do? LOL! Do
    you interface mysql to your office documents for mail merges?


    >
    >>
    >>
    >>> Presentation I'll leave open for debate, I generally don't have a need
    >>> for pretty little slides. I can't make a comparison here.

    >>
    >> So thats presentations off too .... Good.
    >>
    >>
    >>> So those two are irrelevant to me in either office suite so I'll just
    >>> compare the two things I use:

    >>
    >> Irrelevant to you eh? Good ....

    >
    > Well I can't make a fair comparison to components I do not use, now
    > can I?


    No. Which makes all your rantings null and void. You use the WP for
    simple letters. You are in NO position to judge.

  19. Re: Oops...

    On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 06:46:55 +0000, Christopher Hunter wrote:

    > Even Microsoft admit that Vista is a disaster - sales have been
    > "disappointing", there are new malware infections /specifically/ targeting
    > it, and they're releasing the next version "Windows 7" /very/ early...


    Ooh, even rawer than usual?

    That one should be fun.

    Although not for the NOC guys.

    --

    Kill. Kill! KILL!

    < comp.os.linux.misc

    http://rute.2038bug.com/index.html.gz


  20. Re: Oops...

    Frank wrote:

    > > Man, I've YET to come across a single one thing that OO can't
    > > do that I need.

    >
    > Simple letters, yes. Try something with a macro.


    Like a virus?

    *snicker*


+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast