A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

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.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 8 » Windows 8 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Data Microsoft collects



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old May 22nd 15, 05:29 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Neil Gould[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 167
Default 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  
Old May 22nd 15, 06:54 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Ken Springer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,817
Default 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  
Old May 22nd 15, 06:56 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Ken Springer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,817
Default 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  
Old May 22nd 15, 07:26 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Neil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 714
Default 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  
Old May 22nd 15, 07:35 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Jonas Klein
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 30
Default 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
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.


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  
Old May 22nd 15, 07:38 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
. . .winston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default 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  
Old May 23rd 15, 12:00 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Neil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 714
Default 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  
Old May 23rd 15, 02:17 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Keith Nuttle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,844
Default 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  
Old May 23rd 15, 07:06 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Ken Springer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,817
Default 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  
Old May 23rd 15, 08:11 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Jonas Klein
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 30
Default 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  
Old May 23rd 15, 01:28 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Neil Gould[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 167
Default 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  
Old May 23rd 15, 03:21 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default 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  
Old May 23rd 15, 03:45 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Slimer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 300
Default 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  
Old May 23rd 15, 04:17 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Ken Springer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,817
Default 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  
Old May 23rd 15, 04:48 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-8
Ken Springer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,817
Default 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
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.