If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
Ken Springer wrote:
On 5/22/15 7:19 AM, Neil Gould wrote: Slimer wrote: On 2015-05-21 11:10 AM, Neil Gould wrote: Slimer wrote: It HAD to be software piracy. I truly don't understand what else could have gone wrong because they also focused on releasing ever more compelling versions of the ST unlike Amiga. It is incredibly sad to see what happened to a platform which honestly seemed superior to the PC until at least 1988. Not even close. Though the Atari was more than adequate for individual hobbyists, the PC was always oriented toward professional users of all types. By 1985 there were a plethora of expansion cards available for the PC that were superior to any other platform, but they cost a lot. 32 bit video graphics editing cards cost about $5K, audio cards were over $1k, and so on. The professional alternatives involved dedicated hardware that cost over $100k for these tasks. Atari's Amiga was the only other computer-based contender in those markets, and I suspect that it was the Amiga that drained the Atari ST development resources. Professional typographic programs such as Ventura Publisher only ran on the PC. When the Mac was introduced, folks flocked to it because they didn't have to be techie pros to get up and running. But there was still a big difference between setting type on an 8" B/W screen vs. the 15" color screens common for PCs. There were a lot of special-purpose expansion cards, such as multi-processor cards for intensive tasks. These are just a few of the factors that established the PC for professionals, and there still isn't much in the way of competition for it. The problem is that to get the same kind of experience from a PC between 1985 and 1989 that you would get from an Amiga or an Atari ST, you had no choice but to pay more. The PC is a platform to build systems for professional use. IBM & MS established industry standards for hardware and software that allowed developers to market advanced products, the result being both better performance and a better investment for businesses. Apple captured the "out of the box" market after moving away from their Apple ][, and neither Commodore nor Atari could keep up or overtake the momentum from either of those directions. Essentially, the PC didn't deserve to win because it _required_ additional cards to be as functional as what its competitors had for a lot less. Those "competitors" were a bad investment for businesses because they were not compatible with anything that was actually being used. Every try to run Lotus 123 or WordPerfect on an Atari ST? 1-2-3 no, but WP yes. I still have my 4.x disks and manual for the Atari ST. I know that folks can run software on non-standard OSes. The question is, is it worth it (The answer is already determined by the marketplace)? If you think about it, it wasn't the program, it was the file created that was the problem. My first computer was, and still is (G) an Atari 800. I couldn't use Zardax or Appleworks, but if I could have read and written their files, who would have cared what program I used? It's the end product that's important, not the program being used. Or which computer system. On one hand the file format is always the issue. Many people are willing to use software that can read another app's format and save a file in that format. The problem is, this only works for elementary-level work and screws up anything else. Businesses are not going to go through that, and one great way to lose a customer is to screw up their file after you edit it. The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. If you're the last step in the process, no problem. But, if it's an interactive process, forget it (see above). Since we are now in a global economy or whatever, why would you want to force people to use MS Office over Libre Office when you compare capabilities? Because Libre/Open office is a real hack job compared to MS Office. If all one needs is elementary work, those apps are OK, and I use it for that kind of thing on a couple of computers. But, for complex spreadsheets or heavily formatted documents one will waste a good deal of time and possibly never get finished because of the many bugs that exist that will probably never be corrected. [...] History shows that the PC was and still is the winning concept for professionals, so it's hard to argue that it wasn't a deserved outcome. I don't think you are on solid ground by saying the PC is the winning concept. Today, it's the only concept. The last one standing is a good definition of winning, AFAICT. I think if computer users in general were more knowledgeable, MS wouldn't have it as easy as they do. That's a tough speculation to supportn with facts. -- best regards, Neil |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On 5/22/15 10:19 AM, Jonas Klein wrote:
Am 22.05.2015 um 15:58 schrieb Ken Springer: The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. Wrong! I am a translator and I usually want to overwrite PDF files in order to give my customers a translated file with the same formats. Always a pain in the ass if all I get is an image PDF. I wish you had given us more information about how and what you do. At the moment, it sounds like the problem is the source information for the PDF file, not the fact it's a PDF file. I don't think you are on solid ground by saying the PC is the winning concept. Today, it's the only concept. No one else is in that marketplace, MS has a monopoly, there's no arguing that point. As with all monopolies, with no competition, they don't have to do their best. Mac, Linux ... But the systems are aimed for different markets, so you can't really compare them when the jobs they are generally accomplishing are not the same. Rather like comparing the family car to a limousine and a hearse. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.5 Firefox 36.0.4 Thunderbird 31.5 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On 5/22/15 11:05 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 18:19:59 +0200, Jonas Klein wrote: Am 22.05.2015 um 15:58 schrieb Ken Springer: The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. Wrong! I am a translator and I usually want to overwrite PDF files in order to give my customers a translated file with the same formats. Always a pain in the ass if all I get is an image PDF. That is where Acrobat portfolios come in handy, but the vast majority of people are not familiar with them. I've never heard of it. LOL Which means I've never used it. Then, I'd never heard of Curl either, until a need came up and that was the cat's meow for a solution. In general, would portfolios be useful to the average user, or even small to medium sized businesses? Would the cost be acceptable in general to that group of users? -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.5 Firefox 36.0.4 Thunderbird 31.5 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On 5/22/2015 1:56 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 5/22/15 11:05 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote: On Fri, 22 May 2015 18:19:59 +0200, Jonas Klein wrote: Am 22.05.2015 um 15:58 schrieb Ken Springer: The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. Wrong! I am a translator and I usually want to overwrite PDF files in order to give my customers a translated file with the same formats. Always a pain in the ass if all I get is an image PDF. That is where Acrobat portfolios come in handy, but the vast majority of people are not familiar with them. I've never heard of it. LOL Which means I've never used it. Then, I'd never heard of Curl either, until a need came up and that was the cat's meow for a solution. In general, would portfolios be useful to the average user, or even small to medium sized businesses? Would the cost be acceptable in general to that group of users? The question is, "useful for what?" IMO, editing PDFs is attacking the problem from the wrong end. As one who has used the PDF format since it was introduced, and even written programs to create PDFs, one thing I've seen is that there are a lot of PDFs created by non-Adobe apps that do not follow the spec. A lot of time can be wasted editing them, because they just get trashed. The best approach is to edit the original file and create a new PDF, since even those apps that create marginal PDFs may be OK for the intended use. -- best regards, Neil |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
Am 22.05.2015 um 20:26 schrieb Neil:
On 5/22/2015 1:56 PM, Ken Springer wrote: On 5/22/15 11:05 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote: On Fri, 22 May 2015 18:19:59 +0200, Jonas Klein wrote: Am 22.05.2015 um 15:58 schrieb Ken Springer: The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. Wrong! I am a translator and I usually want to overwrite files in order to give my customers a translated file with the same formats. Always a pain in the ass if all I get is an image PDF. That is where Acrobat portfolios come in handy, but the vast majority of people are not familiar with them. I've never heard of it. LOL Which means I've never used it. Then, I'd never heard of Curl either, until a need came up and that was the cat's meow for a solution. In general, would portfolios be useful to the average user, or even small to medium sized businesses? Would the cost be acceptable in general to that group of users? The question is, "useful for what?" IMO, editing PDFs is attacking the problem from the wrong end. As one who has used the PDF format since it was introduced, and even written programs to create PDFs, one thing I've seen is that there are a lot of PDFs created by non-Adobe apps that do not follow the spec. A lot of time can be wasted editing them, because they just get trashed. The best approach is to edit the original file and create a new PDF, since even those apps that create marginal PDFs may be OK for the intended use. Sure, but how do you edit the original file? Easy, if it is in Word or LibreOffice and my customer sends me the DOC, DOCX or ODT file. But I'm not going to buy AutoCAD or InDesign for a file "once in a while" if I need at least ten jobs to get my money back. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
Slimer wrote:
WordPerfect existed on the Atari ST and as far as I know, it saved in the same format as its Mac and PC counterpart. The problem was that the software was quickly removed from store shelves because the company refused to support the platform because of its rampant piracy. I have no idea about whether Lotus existed or not for the ST. VisiCalc (VC; published by VisiCorp, developed by Software Arts - the latter received up to half of the VisiCalc revenue [70% of VisiCorp revenue]) was available for the Atari 8-bit family/devices. When Lotus 123 was released supplanted VC in the market primarily due to its ability to fully support a GUI and take advantage of expanded memory. A few years after 123 was released, VisiCorp now insolvent, Lotus purchased Software Arts and discontinued VC sales and the product. Lotus 123 was available for MS-dos, Windows, OS/2 and the Mac OS. -- ...winston msft mvp consumer apps |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On 5/22/2015 2:35 PM, Jonas Klein wrote:
Am 22.05.2015 um 20:26 schrieb Neil: The best approach is to edit the original file and create a new PDF, since even those apps that create marginal PDFs may be OK for the intended use. Sure, but how do you edit the original file? Easy, if it is in Word or LibreOffice and my customer sends me the DOC, DOCX or ODT file. But I'm not going to buy AutoCAD or InDesign for a file "once in a while" if I need at least ten jobs to get my money back. Then, you refer your customer to someone who can do the job with the requisite tools. Or, you can screw up their 4 color + spot separations and foot their bill from the printer. Your choice. -- best regards, Neil |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On 5/22/2015 12:19 PM, Jonas Klein wrote:
Am 22.05.2015 um 15:58 schrieb Ken Springer: The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. Wrong! I am a translator and I usually want to overwrite PDF files in order to give my customers a translated file with the same formats. Always a pain in the ass if all I get is an image PDF. Whether a PDF is an image or not has nothing to do with the fact that it is a PDF file but rather where the PDF was sourced from. If the person printed a PDF file directly from a program as formatted text strings (WordPerfect, MS Word, Quattro Pro, Excel, etc) to the PDF file. the text can be copied from the PDF file the same as if it were in its native program. If the PDF file was printed to paper, and then scanned and printed to a PDF file then the PDF File contains an image of the document. To convert this back to text you must run it through an OCR program. If your client ask if he can print to PDF files, rather that to paper and scan to a PDF file. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On 5/22/15 10:29 AM, Neil Gould wrote:
Ken Springer wrote: On 5/22/15 7:19 AM, Neil Gould wrote: Slimer wrote: On 2015-05-21 11:10 AM, Neil Gould wrote: Slimer wrote: It HAD to be software piracy. I truly don't understand what else could have gone wrong because they also focused on releasing ever more compelling versions of the ST unlike Amiga. It is incredibly sad to see what happened to a platform which honestly seemed superior to the PC until at least 1988. Not even close. Though the Atari was more than adequate for individual hobbyists, the PC was always oriented toward professional users of all types. By 1985 there were a plethora of expansion cards available for the PC that were superior to any other platform, but they cost a lot. 32 bit video graphics editing cards cost about $5K, audio cards were over $1k, and so on. The professional alternatives involved dedicated hardware that cost over $100k for these tasks. Atari's Amiga was the only other computer-based contender in those markets, and I suspect that it was the Amiga that drained the Atari ST development resources. Professional typographic programs such as Ventura Publisher only ran on the PC. When the Mac was introduced, folks flocked to it because they didn't have to be techie pros to get up and running. But there was still a big difference between setting type on an 8" B/W screen vs. the 15" color screens common for PCs. There were a lot of special-purpose expansion cards, such as multi-processor cards for intensive tasks. These are just a few of the factors that established the PC for professionals, and there still isn't much in the way of competition for it. The problem is that to get the same kind of experience from a PC between 1985 and 1989 that you would get from an Amiga or an Atari ST, you had no choice but to pay more. The PC is a platform to build systems for professional use. IBM & MS established industry standards for hardware and software that allowed developers to market advanced products, the result being both better performance and a better investment for businesses. Apple captured the "out of the box" market after moving away from their Apple ][, and neither Commodore nor Atari could keep up or overtake the momentum from either of those directions. Essentially, the PC didn't deserve to win because it _required_ additional cards to be as functional as what its competitors had for a lot less. Those "competitors" were a bad investment for businesses because they were not compatible with anything that was actually being used. Every try to run Lotus 123 or WordPerfect on an Atari ST? 1-2-3 no, but WP yes. I still have my 4.x disks and manual for the Atari ST. I know that folks can run software on non-standard OSes. The question is, is it worth it (The answer is already determined by the marketplace)? In those days, the Atari file format and the PC file format for Word Perfect were the same. The Mac format wasn't, because the Mac format had graphic capabilities the PC couldn't do. The Atari could do those formats, but WP chose not to go that route, apparently. If you think about it, it wasn't the program, it was the file created that was the problem. My first computer was, and still is (G) an Atari 800. I couldn't use Zardax or Appleworks, but if I could have read and written their files, who would have cared what program I used? It's the end product that's important, not the program being used. Or which computer system. On one hand the file format is always the issue. Many people are willing to use software that can read another app's format and save a file in that format. The problem is, this only works for elementary-level work and screws up anything else. Businesses are not going to go through that, and one great way to lose a customer is to screw up their file after you edit it. The problem is likely to be the proprietary file format that is the problem. If everyone switched to the same file format, and followed the rules for that format, I don't see where there would be a problem. But that doesn't include the issues that arise due to buggy software. The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. If you're the last step in the process, no problem. But, if it's an interactive process, forget it (see above). IMO, an interactive process shouldn't be a problem either. Rather than having X number of people return X number of files all in .doc/.docx file format, just have them use the annotation function of the a PDF reader, and return the annotated PDF. Then, you have only one ..doc/.docx file to combine the edits in. Since we are now in a global economy or whatever, why would you want to force people to use MS Office over Libre Office when you compare capabilities? Because Libre/Open office is a real hack job compared to MS Office. If all one needs is elementary work, those apps are OK, and I use it for that kind of thing on a couple of computers. But, for complex spreadsheets or heavily formatted documents one will waste a good deal of time and possibly never get finished because of the many bugs that exist that will probably never be corrected. I'll agree about the bugs. I filed two bugs that were not important to them to fix, which is why I gave up on LO. But just a few months ago, I got emails that my bugs were now being worked on. Maybe there's been a perspective change. I just downloaded and installed the latest LO. Ugliest interface I think I've ever seen. I'd take the Office ribbon of the current LO default. LOL [...] History shows that the PC was and still is the winning concept for professionals, so it's hard to argue that it wasn't a deserved outcome. I don't think you are on solid ground by saying the PC is the winning concept. Today, it's the only concept. The last one standing is a good definition of winning, AFAICT. But on what basis did you become the last one standing? If it's on the merits of your product, then I agree. But if you got there by breaking agreements and MS broke many and lost in court, or the other guys were badly managed, underfunded, whatever, then you didn't become the last one standing because of a superior product. I think if computer users in general were more knowledgeable, MS wouldn't have it as easy as they do. That's a tough speculation to supportn with facts. I don't know how you would ever devise a method of testing this. But I know, based on simply talking with people, that once their knowledge has been increased about the options, You can see the light bulbs go on. G The simple fact is, a lot of people think they need MS Office, when the truth is for what they are going to try to do, it can be done with less expensive and even free software. Not to mention, a lot of these folks may have better places to spend their money than on MS software. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.5 Firefox 36.0.4 Thunderbird 31.5 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
Am 23.05.2015 um 03:17 schrieb Keith Nuttle:
On 5/22/2015 12:19 PM, Jonas Klein wrote: Am 22.05.2015 um 15:58 schrieb Ken Springer: The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. Wrong! I am a translator and I usually want to overwrite PDF files in order to give my customers a translated file with the same formats. Always a pain in the ass if all I get is an image PDF. Whether a PDF is an image or not has nothing to do with the fact that it is a PDF file but rather where the PDF was sourced from. If the person printed a PDF file directly from a program as formatted text strings (WordPerfect, MS Word, Quattro Pro, Excel, etc) to the PDF file. the text can be copied from the PDF file the same as if it were in its native program. If the PDF file was printed to paper, and then scanned and printed to a PDF file then the PDF File contains an image of the document. To convert this back to text you must run it through an OCR program. If your client ask if he can print to PDF files, rather that to paper and scan to a PDF file. You and Neil understand my problems, unlike Ken, if he sticks to his statement that we only need to be able to read PDF files. Quite often my customers have a piece of paper, e.g. a certificate, scan it and send it to me as PDF. They do not and should not have the formatted text strings. Otherwise they could change a D to A+. ;-) What could I do or suggest, apart from OCR with its imprecisions? To Neil: yep, that's what I do. If a customer wants an AutoCad file, he either buys me the program or goes somewhere else. I'd buy it myself if using it gives me 10,000 $ in one year, but not if I get back from it 1,000 $ in ten years. Even Ken is right, in a sense. MY documents can be done with LibreOffice. Unfortunately, the conversion ODT-DOCX or Impress-PowerPoint is not perfect for many documents from my customers. |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
Ken Springer wrote:
On 5/22/15 10:29 AM, Neil Gould wrote: I know that folks can run software on non-standard OSes. The question is, is it worth it (The answer is already determined by the marketplace)? In those days, the Atari file format and the PC file format for Word Perfect were the same. That is because it was the same program! The Mac format wasn't, because the Mac format had graphic capabilities the PC couldn't do. Not so, by a long shot. I was doing graphics using PCs long before the Mac was introduced, and when it was, it used the established graphic file formats. The difference was that the Mac used "little endian" coding and forked file formats, so its files couldn't be read by PCs unless one had a translator. But, even those existed. On one hand the file format is always the issue. Many people are willing to use software that can read another app's format and save a file in that format. The problem is, this only works for elementary-level work and screws up anything else. Businesses are not going to go through that, and one great way to lose a customer is to screw up their file after you edit it. The problem is likely to be the proprietary file format that is the problem. If everyone switched to the same file format, and followed the rules for that format, I don't see where there would be a problem. But that doesn't include the issues that arise due to buggy software. Proprietary file formats aren't going to go away. People want apps with the capability to do a complete job with their tasks, even when those tasks are unreasonable. A few years ago, I resolved an issue that a company using MS-Word got into when they created a 700+ page instruction manual with graphics, charts, etc. That is the wrong app for that job, but if one knows Word's quirks, it can be done, and it cost them less for me to "fix" it than to convert it to Ventura or FrameMaker. OTOH, trying to do those documents with an open format, such as SGML or XML would be a real PITA, because those formats have serious limitations. If you're the last step in the process, no problem. But, if it's an interactive process, forget it (see above). IMO, an interactive process shouldn't be a problem either. Rather than having X number of people return X number of files all in .doc/.docx file format, just have them use the annotation function of the a PDF reader, and return the annotated PDF. Then, you have only one .doc/.docx file to combine the edits in. If the document has any sophisticated formatting, forget it. That isn't the intended use of PDFs, and only works with very elementary layouts. History shows that the PC was and still is the winning concept for professionals, so it's hard to argue that it wasn't a deserved outcome. I don't think you are on solid ground by saying the PC is the winning concept. Today, it's the only concept. The last one standing is a good definition of winning, AFAICT. But on what basis did you become the last one standing? If it's on the merits of your product, then I agree. But if you got there by breaking agreements and MS broke many and lost in court, or the other guys were badly managed, underfunded, whatever, then you didn't become the last one standing because of a superior product. Everything you mentioned are the dynamics of the marketplace. Just as Apple tried to sue MS for having a GUI in Windows when they ripped it off from PARC in the forst place, or has "patented" rectangles and sued Samsung for having rectangular phones, it's all a catfight. I think if computer users in general were more knowledgeable, MS wouldn't have it as easy as they do. That's a tough speculation to supportn with facts. I don't know how you would ever devise a method of testing this. But I know, based on simply talking with people, that once their knowledge has been increased about the options, You can see the light bulbs go on. G The simple fact is, a lot of people think they need MS Office, when the truth is for what they are going to try to do, it can be done with less expensive and even free software. Not to mention, a lot of these folks may have better places to spend their money than on MS software. I agree that most people's needs don't exceed open-source capabilities, but there are other things to consider. I gave one of my customers with very basic needs OpenOffice, which he tried for about a year but wound up buying MS-Office because he already knew how to use it. In short, OO stumped him from doing his work because of poor and inaccurate documentation. As for the cost, what is more expensive, spending a couple hundred once, or spending many hours in perpetuity trying to accomplish what you already knew how to do in another program? I think one needs to be much more knowledgable to work around unexpected, undocumented bugs in open-source than to use software that just works as intended. ;-) -- best regards, Neil |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On Sat, 23 May 2015 07:28:17 -0500, "Neil Gould"
wrote: Ken Springer wrote: On 5/22/15 10:29 AM, Neil Gould wrote: I know that folks can run software on non-standard OSes. The question is, is it worth it (The answer is already determined by the marketplace)? In those days, the Atari file format and the PC file format for Word Perfect were the same. That is because it was the same program! Didn't the Atari and the PC have completely different CPUs and memory structures? How would the same program run in both environments? Unless you only meant to say that the two programs had the same name. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On 2015-05-22 2:38 PM, . . .winston wrote:
Slimer wrote: WordPerfect existed on the Atari ST and as far as I know, it saved in the same format as its Mac and PC counterpart. The problem was that the software was quickly removed from store shelves because the company refused to support the platform because of its rampant piracy. I have no idea about whether Lotus existed or not for the ST. VisiCalc (VC; published by VisiCorp, developed by Software Arts - the latter received up to half of the VisiCalc revenue [70% of VisiCorp revenue]) was available for the Atari 8-bit family/devices. When Lotus 123 was released supplanted VC in the market primarily due to its ability to fully support a GUI and take advantage of expanded memory. A few years after 123 was released, VisiCorp now insolvent, Lotus purchased Software Arts and discontinued VC sales and the product. Lotus 123 was available for MS-dos, Windows, OS/2 and the Mac OS. Considering how important spreadsheets are to businesses, I can imagine that Windows and Mac OS were therefore prioritized over the alternatives on which Lotus 1-2-3 did not appear. The question is therefore why Lotus ignores the Amiga and the ST as a platform but released it on something unpopular like OS/2. I can imagine people buying a PC or a Mac to continue their work at home with Lotus 1-2-3. If the ST and Amiga didn't make that possible, it's no wonder they never got any further than they did. -- Slimer Encrypt. "Like NTFS, which is at best at beta stage right now?" - Peter "the Klöwn" Köhlmann suggesting that NTFS is an unfinished filesystem in defense of ext4 being shown to corrupt data in Linux's 4.0 kernel |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On 5/22/15 12:26 PM, Neil wrote:
On 5/22/2015 1:56 PM, Ken Springer wrote: On 5/22/15 11:05 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote: On Fri, 22 May 2015 18:19:59 +0200, Jonas Klein wrote: Am 22.05.2015 um 15:58 schrieb Ken Springer: The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. Wrong! I am a translator and I usually want to overwrite PDF files in order to give my customers a translated file with the same formats. Always a pain in the ass if all I get is an image PDF. That is where Acrobat portfolios come in handy, but the vast majority of people are not familiar with them. I've never heard of it. LOL Which means I've never used it. Then, I'd never heard of Curl either, until a need came up and that was the cat's meow for a solution. In general, would portfolios be useful to the average user, or even small to medium sized businesses? Would the cost be acceptable in general to that group of users? The question is, "useful for what?" IMO, editing PDFs is attacking the problem from the wrong end. As one who has used the PDF format since it was introduced, and even written programs to create PDFs, one thing I've seen is that there are a lot of PDFs created by non-Adobe apps that do not follow the spec. A lot of time can be wasted editing them, because they just get trashed. The best approach is to edit the original file and create a new PDF, since even those apps that create marginal PDFs may be OK for the intended use. I have never understood the idea of editing a PDF file. If you're going to do that, why not just send the original around for editing? So I think we agree, use the PDF files for feedback, then edit the original. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.5 Firefox 36.0.4 Thunderbird 31.5 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Data Microsoft collects
On 5/23/15 1:11 AM, Jonas Klein wrote:
Am 23.05.2015 um 03:17 schrieb Keith Nuttle: On 5/22/2015 12:19 PM, Jonas Klein wrote: Am 22.05.2015 um 15:58 schrieb Ken Springer: The world started slowly moving that way when Adobe created and released the PDF file format. Now you have the open file formats (odt, ods, etc.). Who cares what program the originator of a file used? When you get a PDF file do you really care if Adobe Acrobat created the file? Or Word? Or Word Perfect? AutoCAD? MicroCAD? No. You just want to be able to read it. Wrong! I am a translator and I usually want to overwrite PDF files in order to give my customers a translated file with the same formats. Always a pain in the ass if all I get is an image PDF. Whether a PDF is an image or not has nothing to do with the fact that it is a PDF file but rather where the PDF was sourced from. If the person printed a PDF file directly from a program as formatted text strings (WordPerfect, MS Word, Quattro Pro, Excel, etc) to the PDF file. the text can be copied from the PDF file the same as if it were in its native program. If the PDF file was printed to paper, and then scanned and printed to a PDF file then the PDF File contains an image of the document. To convert this back to text you must run it through an OCR program. If your client ask if he can print to PDF files, rather that to paper and scan to a PDF file. You and Neil understand my problems, unlike Ken, if he sticks to his statement that we only need to be able to read PDF files. I still don't understand exactly what it is you do. LOL I had planned on saying exactly what Keith said, he just got to it first. :-) When I wrote the comment, I was thinking of a situation where a group of people are collaborating on a project, and need to create a report, plan, drawings, something as a group, not as individuals. Only one person should have control of the document creation. You preferably or someone writes the original. Create a PDF from the original, and send it to the other members individually. They should be instructed to use the annotation feature to send feedback of what they would like to see changed. *NO* editing of the original text. That leaves you with the original text to compare with the changes that individual wants. And I think that would eliminate problems with programs that don't always follow the specs, as someone mention in a post I can't find. G Sophisticated word processors have the ability to manage edits, tracking, etc. Been there, done that, and more often than not, the end product was deficient and/or in error somewhere. Quite often my customers have a piece of paper, e.g. a certificate, scan it and send it to me as PDF. They do not and should not have the formatted text strings. Otherwise they could change a D to A+. ;-) What could I do or suggest, apart from OCR with its imprecisions? To Neil: yep, that's what I do. If a customer wants an AutoCad file, he either buys me the program or goes somewhere else. I'd buy it myself if using it gives me 10,000 $ in one year, but not if I get back from it 1,000 $ in ten years. Even Ken is right, in a sense. MY documents can be done with LibreOffice. Unfortunately, the conversion ODT-DOCX or Impress-PowerPoint is not perfect for many documents from my customers. That type of conversion I wouldn't want to do either! In either direction. LOL H-e-double hockey sticks, even MS can't always do conversions of Word documents between various releases. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.5 Firefox 36.0.4 Thunderbird 31.5 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|