A Bunch Of Crybabies?
-
That's just it, she doesn't have to continue upgrading. But you can't expect software advances to continue running on old hardware, can you? Let her run card games, a web browser, and a word processor. She just can't expect to run Windows Vista on a Pentium 133Mhz, just like I can't expect to run Doom 3 on my Nintendo Entertainment System.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
well thats great then but will the os she uses be supported into the future? will there be updates and security releases? when the advances are valid for good reasons then great: "mom upgrade beacuse u will get x y and z that u cant get now" as opposed to: "mom upgrade now because u will get... errrrr shiny buttons" uh huh
"there is no spoon"
biz stuff about me -- modified at 12:46 Friday 16th September, 2005 -
l a u r e n wrote: criticise what u know not what u imagine k? Take your own advice, I've used Linux.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
and ive written software for all the platforms since u were in diapers ... using doesnt mean u know ... it means u used it once in a while ... like i said try talking about what u know for a change [edit] ok i didnt see the link u posted above ... excuse me while i try to stop laughing ... i dont want to rain on ur parade here but using a monolive cd isnt actually the same as "knowing linux" judah :laugh: [/edit]
"there is no spoon"
biz stuff about me -- modified at 12:43 Friday 16th September, 2005 -
That's fine, best of luck to you both. My question is, why the whining and wailing about Vista, complaining "what's the point", then? After all, most of us on CP make a living writing software for Windows, but do you see us complaining about how long it takes to compile the latest Linux 2.6 kernel, or how such a poor user interface could've made it into a released product like GIMP? Yet we consistently hear from the Linux camp about how Microsoft's new software sucks, is pointless, is too expensive, requires too expensive hardware, eats too much memory, is a rip-off of Company XYZ's product, and so on. It really gets tiresome, and I think is what the original poster was getting at.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote: Yet we consistently hear from the Linux camp about how Microsoft's new software sucks, is pointless No we don't - not here on CP anyway. Slashdot, yes. :) And, besides, you are implying that we should all toe the party line - there's no fun in that Judah. :) :) I will give my customers what they want, and I tell you right now, they don't give a damn about Vista. So why should I care? Hell, I know of plenty of big financial companies that are still running Windows 2000. It seems to be that MS have ripped some of the genuinely useful stuff out of Vista so they can get it to market quickly. I'm sure the new UI, with it's usefulless transparent windows (ha ha) will be fab, but I'm not wetting my pants just yet. I have made my career off the back of MS Windows, and, to be frank, if people like me are jaded, bored and uninspired, then perhaps, just perhaps, MS are not the company they used to be? Money talks. My customers come first. If they want Linux apps, or web apps running off the back of Apache/PHP, then that's what I'll give them. Period.
The Rob Blog
Google Talk: robert.caldecott -
l a u r e n wrote: u dont have to compile anything True, but here's the install instructions direct from the openoffice web site. Not exactly straightforward, is it?
-
Make sure you are root
-
Download the tarball from OpenOffice.org (the download can be done from any user account and then moved), and extract the tarball (.tar.gz file) to a temporary directory.
"/tmp" is a good place for example. For the purpose of this example, I will assume you have downloaded the tarball to your/tmpdirectory. -
Open a terminal, such as xterm or konsole.
To extract the tarball, change to the/tmpdirectory:cd /tmp
and extract the tarball: "tar -zxvf [tarball name]". -
This should create a directory "
OOo_1.1x_LinuxIntel_install".
("x" in this sense is a suffix to version 1.1 that will depend on the version you downloaded.) -
Change into this directory:
cd OOo_1.1x_LinuxIntel_install. -
Execute the setup script for a "network" installation.
This is done with the following command: "./setup -net"
This is a friendly installation process which will prompt you for a destination directory and other OpenOffice installation options. When the setup is finished, you should have a complete "network" installation installed in the destination directory you specified. Tips on installing OpenOffice.org with an NFS setup can be found on our nfs tips page.**Note:**It is NOT advisable to install over an existing OpenOffice installation. If you want to use the same destination as an existing version of OpenOffice, delete the contents of the existing directory!
-
Part of the installation process includes telling OpenOffice about your Java installation. Normally this can be automatically found or you may need to supply it, or install the JRE supplied with OpenOffice if you don't already have it installed. (But see Prerequisites for more control over this.)
-
Each user on your syste
-
-
l a u r e n wrote: u dont have to compile anything True, but here's the install instructions direct from the openoffice web site. Not exactly straightforward, is it?
-
Make sure you are root
-
Download the tarball from OpenOffice.org (the download can be done from any user account and then moved), and extract the tarball (.tar.gz file) to a temporary directory.
"/tmp" is a good place for example. For the purpose of this example, I will assume you have downloaded the tarball to your/tmpdirectory. -
Open a terminal, such as xterm or konsole.
To extract the tarball, change to the/tmpdirectory:cd /tmp
and extract the tarball: "tar -zxvf [tarball name]". -
This should create a directory "
OOo_1.1x_LinuxIntel_install".
("x" in this sense is a suffix to version 1.1 that will depend on the version you downloaded.) -
Change into this directory:
cd OOo_1.1x_LinuxIntel_install. -
Execute the setup script for a "network" installation.
This is done with the following command: "./setup -net"
This is a friendly installation process which will prompt you for a destination directory and other OpenOffice installation options. When the setup is finished, you should have a complete "network" installation installed in the destination directory you specified. Tips on installing OpenOffice.org with an NFS setup can be found on our nfs tips page.**Note:**It is NOT advisable to install over an existing OpenOffice installation. If you want to use the same destination as an existing version of OpenOffice, delete the contents of the existing directory!
-
Part of the installation process includes telling OpenOffice about your Java installation. Normally this can be automatically found or you may need to supply it, or install the JRE supplied with OpenOffice if you don't already have it installed. (But see Prerequisites for more control over this.)
-
Each user on your syste
-
-
well thats great then but will the os she uses be supported into the future? will there be updates and security releases? when the advances are valid for good reasons then great: "mom upgrade beacuse u will get x y and z that u cant get now" as opposed to: "mom upgrade now because u will get... errrrr shiny buttons" uh huh
"there is no spoon"
biz stuff about me -- modified at 12:46 Friday 16th September, 2005l a u r e n wrote: but will the os she uses be supported into the future? Red herring. You yourself cannot guarantee that Red Hat, or any other company will continue developing their Linux Distro. Or can you guarantee that the ambivalent crowd of open source developers who work on an Linux-based OS will keep pumping out patches and updates that work for all versions -- even old versions -- of an OS? No! I will recommend people upgrade from XP to Vista because there's more protection against malware, there's built-in features for letting your kids run only certain games, let your kids have a limited time on the computer, a new limited user account model that prevents malware from doing damage if run, a new set of applications that run in a managed security sandbox, an more secure browser, simpler file and printer sharing, reliability features in startup repair tools, auto-diagnosis, and automatic error correction tools, improved performance in Fast Startup technology, instant sleep awake, faster logons with non-system services starting as non-critical background processes (fewer processes to start up), new organization techniques such as virtual folders, instant searching, oh, and let's not forget your pretty buttons: one major bane of Linux-based OSes is that developers assume UIs are unimportant. NEVER understimate the importance of a graceful, elegant, pretty UI. Just ask Google. Let us not forget, lest you come back and say 'you can get all those thing by running XYZ!', that unlike OSX or other Unix-based operating systems, with Windows Vista, my mom can still run the applications she uses on a daily basis without having to learn anything new.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-
l a u r e n wrote: thats cos its beta and u know it Simply not true. That text is from the page titled "Instructions for Installing and Setting Up OpenOffice.org 1.1.x". That is the stable release, isn't it? l a u r e n wrote: name calling Name calling? What? My point is that the Linux install is *much* more complex than the corresponding Windows install for the same product.
-
That's fine, best of luck to you both. My question is, why the whining and wailing about Vista, complaining "what's the point", then? After all, most of us on CP make a living writing software for Windows, but do you see us complaining about how long it takes to compile the latest Linux 2.6 kernel, or how such a poor user interface could've made it into a released product like GIMP? Yet we consistently hear from the Linux camp about how Microsoft's new software sucks, is pointless, is too expensive, requires too expensive hardware, eats too much memory, is a rip-off of Company XYZ's product, and so on. It really gets tiresome, and I think is what the original poster was getting at.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
It all comes back to the almighty dollar. I'll pay some money up front so I don't have to spend two hours reading some guys how-to guide just to set up my IM program. At the same time, if I'm trying to just test some stuff or just get general use from a system then the cheaper the better. Same way for companies also. Pay a guy less to work with Windows because in theory it's easy to use and you can teach a customer service person to work it(trust me, I've seen it) or get the "free" software and pay a "geek" more to administrate it and risk him leaving and you not knowing anything about your system. Trade-offs and I agree here that the argument is getting old. I've used both systems and think both are great. I use Windows primarily because I haven't got time to teach my wife how to use Linux. One of these days though... ------------------------------------- Do not do what has already been done.
-
l a u r e n wrote: but will the os she uses be supported into the future? Red herring. You yourself cannot guarantee that Red Hat, or any other company will continue developing their Linux Distro. Or can you guarantee that the ambivalent crowd of open source developers who work on an Linux-based OS will keep pumping out patches and updates that work for all versions -- even old versions -- of an OS? No! I will recommend people upgrade from XP to Vista because there's more protection against malware, there's built-in features for letting your kids run only certain games, let your kids have a limited time on the computer, a new limited user account model that prevents malware from doing damage if run, a new set of applications that run in a managed security sandbox, an more secure browser, simpler file and printer sharing, reliability features in startup repair tools, auto-diagnosis, and automatic error correction tools, improved performance in Fast Startup technology, instant sleep awake, faster logons with non-system services starting as non-critical background processes (fewer processes to start up), new organization techniques such as virtual folders, instant searching, oh, and let's not forget your pretty buttons: one major bane of Linux-based OSes is that developers assume UIs are unimportant. NEVER understimate the importance of a graceful, elegant, pretty UI. Just ask Google. Let us not forget, lest you come back and say 'you can get all those thing by running XYZ!', that unlike OSX or other Unix-based operating systems, with Windows Vista, my mom can still run the applications she uses on a daily basis without having to learn anything new.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
"mom u have to get rid of that red hat thingy now cos they dont write software anymore ... they became mormons" "oh really? what will i do now?" "i'll install debian / suse / fedora / etc and put gnome back on it and u wont notice the difference" "ok ... how much will it cost me?" "same as the other one mom ... nothing" "oh ok ... what about all my documents?" "they will be fine cos we are using the same programs we just changed the distro" "do i need to know what a distro is?" "no mom" malaware ... linux doesnt have any ... period [edit] have u actually looked at gnome 2.12?? do u actually understand the concept of open source development? obviously not [/edit]
"there is no spoon"
biz stuff about me -- modified at 13:05 Friday 16th September, 2005 -
and ive written software for all the platforms since u were in diapers ... using doesnt mean u know ... it means u used it once in a while ... like i said try talking about what u know for a change [edit] ok i didnt see the link u posted above ... excuse me while i try to stop laughing ... i dont want to rain on ur parade here but using a monolive cd isnt actually the same as "knowing linux" judah :laugh: [/edit]
"there is no spoon"
biz stuff about me -- modified at 12:43 Friday 16th September, 2005You're going off on a pointless tangent by saying, "Look, I'm better than you because I've used Linux and you've just used a Linux live cd." Well, I'm glad you feel proud of yourself that you can run Linux and know it better than I can. But you never once rebutted my points, Lauren. You don't hear us complaining about Linux, do you? This is what the original poster was getting at, your incessant whining about Microsoft. It's tiresome. What's more, your belittling attitude towards anyone not gung-ho about Linux is quite immature.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-
Why is it that so many people complain about development/evolution of software? Every time MS comes with something new and fancy people go "I Can not afford to develop stuff like that" or "I don't like it, I'm switching to Linux" So maybe you cannot afford to hire a designer for your application, but should progress stop because of that? Just compare todays 24-bit antialiased icons an fancy XP GUI with Win 3.1. Compare the difference between now and the previews of Vista/Office 12 and the difference is not that big. We have all survived the progress so far and we will continue to do so if we spend our energy on our business instead of complaining... And why is it that every time people see something new which they don't fancy thay say they switch to Linux or something? Please do so, I don't know that many successfull commercial applications for Linux and I don't think we will see many any time soon. Please do realize that MS has a lot of money to use on usability tests and they DO spend loads of money on it. Include that with the fact that most developers don't know anything about usability and designing usefull GUI's and even a kid can figure out who us right when it comes to GUI's: MS or the small developer shop... - Anders
I agree completely. Anders Molin wrote: Please do realize that MS has a lot of money to use on usability tests and they DO spend loads of money on it. Include that with the fact that most developers don't know anything about usability and designing usefull GUI's and even a kid can figure out who us right when it comes to GUI's: MS or the small developer shop... Which is exactly why we buy and use the Infragistics UI components. We are a small shop but our apps look as good as any put out by Microsoft. (or at least they will when our first major product is released soon that uses Infragistics. We've learned through trial and error and many years trying to do it ourselves that it's an absolute must to buy some sort of UI framework these days. It saves an incredible amount of time and agony and they are really cheap compared to the costs of trying to roll it ourselves.
"A preoccupation with the next world pretty clearly signals an inability to cope credibly with this one."
-
It all comes back to the almighty dollar. I'll pay some money up front so I don't have to spend two hours reading some guys how-to guide just to set up my IM program. At the same time, if I'm trying to just test some stuff or just get general use from a system then the cheaper the better. Same way for companies also. Pay a guy less to work with Windows because in theory it's easy to use and you can teach a customer service person to work it(trust me, I've seen it) or get the "free" software and pay a "geek" more to administrate it and risk him leaving and you not knowing anything about your system. Trade-offs and I agree here that the argument is getting old. I've used both systems and think both are great. I use Windows primarily because I haven't got time to teach my wife how to use Linux. One of these days though... ------------------------------------- Do not do what has already been done.
-
and ive written software for all the platforms since u were in diapers ... using doesnt mean u know ... it means u used it once in a while ... like i said try talking about what u know for a change [edit] ok i didnt see the link u posted above ... excuse me while i try to stop laughing ... i dont want to rain on ur parade here but using a monolive cd isnt actually the same as "knowing linux" judah :laugh: [/edit]
"there is no spoon"
biz stuff about me -- modified at 12:43 Friday 16th September, 2005l a u r e n wrote: and ive written software for all the platforms since u were in diapers ROFLMAO! :D Good music: In my rosary[^]
-
l a u r e n wrote: thats cos its beta and u know it Simply not true. That text is from the page titled "Instructions for Installing and Setting Up OpenOffice.org 1.1.x". That is the stable release, isn't it? l a u r e n wrote: name calling Name calling? What? My point is that the Linux install is *much* more complex than the corresponding Windows install for the same product.
thats if u want to install from source ... u dont have to as all distros come with it already comiled in ... for free ur being argumentative on purpose so i wont proceed further with this thread ... go read some about linux before u start spouting rubbish for the fanboys ;)
-
Judah Himango wrote: Yet we consistently hear from the Linux camp about how Microsoft's new software sucks, is pointless No we don't - not here on CP anyway. Slashdot, yes. :) And, besides, you are implying that we should all toe the party line - there's no fun in that Judah. :) :) I will give my customers what they want, and I tell you right now, they don't give a damn about Vista. So why should I care? Hell, I know of plenty of big financial companies that are still running Windows 2000. It seems to be that MS have ripped some of the genuinely useful stuff out of Vista so they can get it to market quickly. I'm sure the new UI, with it's usefulless transparent windows (ha ha) will be fab, but I'm not wetting my pants just yet. I have made my career off the back of MS Windows, and, to be frank, if people like me are jaded, bored and uninspired, then perhaps, just perhaps, MS are not the company they used to be? Money talks. My customers come first. If they want Linux apps, or web apps running off the back of Apache/PHP, then that's what I'll give them. Period.
The Rob Blog
Google Talk: robert.caldecottI'm totally in agreement with you there, Robert. Your customers want Linux stuff, mine want Windows stuff (though admittedly, not Vista stuff since no one has it yet!), so, you do what you've got to do. I'm just tired of hearing all the junk about how Microsoft is so evil, bad, useless, etc. I'm sick of it. Maybe I read Slashdot too much. :-)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-- modified at 13:08 Friday 16th September, 2005
-
l a u r e n wrote: but will the os she uses be supported into the future? Red herring. You yourself cannot guarantee that Red Hat, or any other company will continue developing their Linux Distro. Or can you guarantee that the ambivalent crowd of open source developers who work on an Linux-based OS will keep pumping out patches and updates that work for all versions -- even old versions -- of an OS? No! I will recommend people upgrade from XP to Vista because there's more protection against malware, there's built-in features for letting your kids run only certain games, let your kids have a limited time on the computer, a new limited user account model that prevents malware from doing damage if run, a new set of applications that run in a managed security sandbox, an more secure browser, simpler file and printer sharing, reliability features in startup repair tools, auto-diagnosis, and automatic error correction tools, improved performance in Fast Startup technology, instant sleep awake, faster logons with non-system services starting as non-critical background processes (fewer processes to start up), new organization techniques such as virtual folders, instant searching, oh, and let's not forget your pretty buttons: one major bane of Linux-based OSes is that developers assume UIs are unimportant. NEVER understimate the importance of a graceful, elegant, pretty UI. Just ask Google. Let us not forget, lest you come back and say 'you can get all those thing by running XYZ!', that unlike OSX or other Unix-based operating systems, with Windows Vista, my mom can still run the applications she uses on a daily basis without having to learn anything new.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
Another good point. Does anyone know if the current version of GIMP will run flawlessly on the original distro of Debian/Red Hat/Mandrake?:~ ------------------------------------- Do not do what has already been done.
-
You're going off on a pointless tangent by saying, "Look, I'm better than you because I've used Linux and you've just used a Linux live cd." Well, I'm glad you feel proud of yourself that you can run Linux and know it better than I can. But you never once rebutted my points, Lauren. You don't hear us complaining about Linux, do you? This is what the original poster was getting at, your incessant whining about Microsoft. It's tiresome. What's more, your belittling attitude towards anyone not gung-ho about Linux is quite immature.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
and ur holier than thou fanboy bs is really tiresome too but i dont complain about it i raised the issue of my experience to make it clear i do know what im talking about as opposed to someone who has been involved in software development for ... how long judah? ur 22 so i guess 5 years maybe? ... and who has used a linux live cd (which incidentally windows cant do but never mind i digress) once or twice ... and yet u spout about how windows is superior to a product u know jack sh*t about?? go back to school please and get the self-righteous stick out of ur ass
-
You're going off on a pointless tangent by saying, "Look, I'm better than you because I've used Linux and you've just used a Linux live cd." Well, I'm glad you feel proud of yourself that you can run Linux and know it better than I can. But you never once rebutted my points, Lauren. You don't hear us complaining about Linux, do you? This is what the original poster was getting at, your incessant whining about Microsoft. It's tiresome. What's more, your belittling attitude towards anyone not gung-ho about Linux is quite immature.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote: You don't hear us complaining about Linux, do you? I don't know what world you live in, but people do complain about Linux and free software in general. Mainly out of fear for losing their jobs over it. By the way, you did complain about Linux. Why else would you mention your problems with recompilations and crappy GUIs? :) Good music: In my rosary[^]
-
I'm totally in agreement with you there, Robert. Your customers want Linux stuff, mine want Windows stuff (though admittedly, not Vista stuff since no one has it yet!), so, you do what you've got to do. I'm just tired of hearing all the junk about how Microsoft is so evil, bad, useless, etc. I'm sick of it. Maybe I read Slashdot too much. :-)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-- modified at 13:08 Friday 16th September, 2005
-
thats if u want to install from source ... u dont have to as all distros come with it already comiled in ... for free ur being argumentative on purpose so i wont proceed further with this thread ... go read some about linux before u start spouting rubbish for the fanboys ;)
l a u r e n wrote: go read some about linux before u start spouting rubbish And I'm being argumentative? Pots and kettles...