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 |
#271
|
|||
|
|||
Linux user advises Windows newbies! (was - 7 Best Alternatives ToMicrosoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition)
On 09/12/2019 14:41, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
David the Lying Stalker of Devon wrote: On 09/12/2019 01:21, Beauregard T. Shagnasty - still wriggling! David the Liar of Devon wrote: Amazing what happens when the truth is told! It certainly is. You should start sometime soon. [rest not worthy of a reply] Other readers of Usenet groups will ... ..see your constant lying and stalking. They won't! 'Cause I don't - but *YOU* do! *WHY* does a Linux aficionado promote a website discussing Windows? You are the one who is promoting it. Don't you realize that? *NO*! That would be your cohort known as 'Shadow'. He's recently mentioned that it should be taken down:- "Those pages are from way back when he used Windows(or helped someone with Windows, not anyone's business). http://www.tekrider.net/general/wintip01.php File last changed 15 April 2009 It not been altered in OVER 10 years. The text refers to programs updated in 2005." Ref: Message-ID: = Out of date websites do *HARM* - not good. They are a breeding ground for malware. Websites need to be properly maintained and administered. You have failed in your role as Webmaster. :-( |
Ads |
#272
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
On 12/8/2019 4:21 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 09/12/2019 00.03, nospam wrote: In article , Carlos E.R. wrote: It should be obvious that information found online is useless, when the user does not know how to go online. it should be obvious that isn't actually a problem. it's not 1985 anymore. just about everyone already *is* online, has been for years and knows how to search for stuff. It's also not 2185 where everyone has in implant, and is genetically modified to know this at birth. Something you are unable to acknowledge. strawman. the reality is that being online is *not* an obstacle. The reality is, not everyone knows how to do this. nobody said 'everyone'. the number who do not and have nobody to help them get online is a tiny, tiny fraction (as in almost zero), nowhere near enough to justify a company publishing written manuals that everyone else will never look at, never mind read, and which would also need to be ordered online. I know people that have to wait for their son to come for a visit twice a year for that. they are a tiny, tiny minority. Maybe 25% of those I know. That's not tiny :-D you're also ignoring that software distribution is almost entirely online, so if they can manage to get various apps, they can get help for it as well, should it even be needed, which is not a given. this. if someone wants something printed for whatever reason, download the relevant pdfs and print them, either in its entirety or specific pages. Something that some people need someone to demo in person before not being afraid of trying. God forbid if something goes bad and they can't stop the printer. Pull the plug! And the daft thing continues printing the one thousand page book (the wrong book) after being plugged again. that's a stretch. Its happened :-D Ohhh! Another one. Printer that dries or uses up all the ink and "it does not work". I installed a laser. Will not dry in years to come! That's one of the reasons laser printers are much better than inkjet printers, in my opinion. Another reason is that the per page cost of using it is much lower. -- Ken |
#273
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
In article , Ken Blake
wrote: Ohhh! Another one. Printer that dries or uses up all the ink and "it does not work". I installed a laser. Will not dry in years to come! That's one of the reasons laser printers are much better than inkjet printers, in my opinion. Another reason is that the per page cost of using it is much lower. as with everything, it depends. inkjet printers are *much* better for photos and some of them have a lower page cost than laser. |
#274
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
On 12/8/2019 11:53 AM, Mayayana wrote:
There's nothing but TBird that's completely an email and newsgroup program. Agent is another one. But personally I think choosing a program because it does two different things is a mistake. It's best to choose the program for each thing that works the best for you. If the two happen to be the same program, that's fine, but in my experience, that almost never happens. I used to use Agent as my newsreader, but I preferred and used a different program for e-mail. I recently switched to using Thunderbird for newsgroups, because it did some things important to me me better than Agent (but other things not so well). But I still continue to use the separate e-mail client I used before. I feel the same way about suites of programs. I often choose to use one program in a suite because I like it, but I use competitors for other programs in that suite because I like them better. -- Ken |
#275
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
On 12/9/2019 7:11 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"Dan Purgert" wrote | I explored it a fair amount but ended up feeling that | it was a big time sucker. Everything changes. Everything | requires tweaking. | So, your basic progression of "new stuff changes". I mean, it's not like | Windows behaves the same as XP (or 7) these days. | Big difference. Microsoft is religious about backward compatibility. They provide support for 10 years and lots of docs. (Though the end-user docs are pretty bad.) I'm writing this on XP with OE6. Most software still works on XP. OE was just a half-baked afterthough. A default email program. Yet OE6 is arguably better than current products despite being 18 years old. The program folder is 4 MB. TBird is 90 MB, stuffed with dotnet crap, but no help file in sight. Even the Mozilla people don't seem to have full docs for things like prefs. It's not difficult to write software that runs on all Windows versions -- backward and forward. That's like being able to write a program for current Linux and have it work on RedHat 4 seamlessly, with no additional support files or adjustments needed. So, yes, stuff changes in Windows. Especially going from XP to Vista. That was a big jump. But the API didn't change. It was just added to. MS have to offer that kind of support because business requires it. Meanwhile, WINE took 20 years to get to v. 1, with updates every 10 days. It was a training camp for college students, not a professional piece of software. GIMP is similar. And that pretty much covers Linux software for people who are not programmers or scientists. Linux support is typically 18 months. When I want to install anything it needs numerous updates of system files. Ridiculous stuff like 6.143.213.77 isn't good enough. It has to be 6.143.213.88. Docs? If you're lucky it's a man page. Ask the programmer why there are no docs. The answer will probably be something like, "I don't like to write." They say that with diffident pride: "I'm a programmer, not a lackey!" The programmer is a 35 year old teenager who's anxious to get back to his video game where he's killed 1,723 bad guys since last Tuesday and he's hoping to break his own record of 1,947 killed by tomorrow. He's going to have to stay up all night eating candybars and ramen to pull it off. And you want docs?! Where's your sense of priorities, man?! I actually came across something in WINE at one point suggesting that programmers should put comments into their code in a particular format. Those could later be auto-converted to a help file without having to actually write a help file. Any software sold for money has to be far more dependable and complete than that. | Nothing is simple because the people who use it like to feel like | coding commandos. | | I haven't run into that myself ... maybe I got lucky. | And you don't use console windows? Or end up digging down into /etc to change a program setting? Or maybe you just regard that as simple? In Windows it's been almost completely unnecessary to open console windows since about 1995. The last time I did it was to swap out the HAL file from single core to multi-core version. | So everyone brags about using a "shell", by which they mean a console | window where they run DOS-esque commands. | | Which can be the "easier" approach (in terms of less effort on your | part) than using a GUI. Yes. Exactly the answer I'd expect from a Linux fan. It can be highly efficient as a scripting system, to do batch operations, but for normal computer use -- to copy a file, find system info, read help, list directory contents, and so on -- it makes no sense. | Even the OS itself gets very limited support. | | This certainly depends on the distro you choose. Some are better than | others -- although if you're looking for "professional" support, that's | pretty much limited to Red Hat. | I don't mean personal support. I mean supporting their own product, so that necessary patches are available and software will run on it for many years, as with Windows. Many programmers use end of OS support as an excuse to end their support, so if a Linux version is only supported officially for 18 months then whatever you set up initially is "all she wrote". Once it no longer serves you'll have to start all over. | | Didn't desktop publishing get it's start with Macs? | Probably. And graphics. But that was way back when Apple | | "Desktop Publishing" being a graphical environment? I think Xerox or | Sun was "first" in that regard. Apple just took it away from them | pretty quick (and the whole "IBM (clone) with MS Windows" thing didn't | really help anyone out). | He means being able to create your own printed documents without having to paste-up photostat copy. As you may know, not so long ago the only way to print other than a typewriter was to order the text in the desired font as a photostat. The people doing that would set the lead characters, print it, and take a picture. They'd send you the picture. You would then cut that up with a razor blade and stick the words down on a backing with rubber cement. Once done, you'd send the whole thing to the printer. (I know this because I did a bit of paste-up when I was young.) Desktop publishing was the new ability to actually print a finished product yourself. With high end equipment people could print a professional, finished product and cut the photostat people, the typesetters, and the printers out of the picture. Remember those early fliers stapled to telephone poles, in futuristic, blocky fonts in the 80s? That was people with computers showing off that they could print on a piece of paper: "Cat missing. Black and white. Very cute. Answers to Frisky." Below that would be a "picture" of a cat, composed of printed squares, like an image from an early video game. Since Mac had GUI first I suspect they also had desktop publishing first. But I didn't have a computer back then. If they hadn't developed an easy GUI I probably still wouldn't have a computer. I've never needed to do word processing for work so I never had a use for DOS. | was ahead of Windows with graphics. They ended up having | a reputation for being superior for a long time. Long after | | IIRC, the reputation was well earned -- the M68k and later PPC chips had | better pipelines when it came to graphics processing than the Intel x86 | processors of the day. | Yes. But their reputation lasted far beyond that time, for no reason. Some years ago a graphics shop sued Apple after they bought Macs and found the display's top setting was only 18-bit color/ 260K colors, yet the menu selection for that setting was marked "millions of colors". Leave it to Apple to use cute slang to hide sleaze. But if they'd said "tons of colors" they might have protected themselves from a lawsuit. If I knew about that suit, I had forgotten it. Just curious--who won? And how much did they win? -- Ken |
#276
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
On 12/9/2019 6:01 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 snip -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl3uRY wACgkQjhHd8xJ5 ooFuoQf9Gm6+HdDVp5FUcJIlcm8riecPzIq4r6IEZEmfejYII9 uq2WVvxz1E8DC/ qHzoGpJyHmzxKn/JuDwP34y5HxYE/BALC5V52B6ZT6NG+hHLeF7Lj0NE8Ddo2uQS xBLNecuVT2avDjgb9Ang/I9vUXpfd3PaKdHHY6Z7IPcjfYOk3NG7lXPt7Ho2Vm/j CBoni6Q/O7kw9lxzP20AMvGb+jIin7eHrdJU8+SydlhzvaUsiBFsSRFVGO O/Ojkd A2do+2PAn2jcjzJYI4t7e11L0udrqNxglJQ4pc9rBwLdngHuPQ I1M6jY3qBtB/jy ltCCZsUps01BTGZEPXGtY0VVeIUIiQ== =BAg7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- I don't know how anybody else feels about your PGP signatures, but I'll tell you how I feel. I hate them. They add nothing to your posts and just clutters them up. So I'd like to suggest that you stop incorporating them in your messages. -- Ken |
#277
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
On 2019-12-09 10:13 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
On 12/9/2019 6:01 AM, Dan Purgert wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 snip -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl3uRY wACgkQjhHd8xJ5 ooFuoQf9Gm6+HdDVp5FUcJIlcm8riecPzIq4r6IEZEmfejYII9 uq2WVvxz1E8DC/ qHzoGpJyHmzxKn/JuDwP34y5HxYE/BALC5V52B6ZT6NG+hHLeF7Lj0NE8Ddo2uQS xBLNecuVT2avDjgb9Ang/I9vUXpfd3PaKdHHY6Z7IPcjfYOk3NG7lXPt7Ho2Vm/j CBoni6Q/O7kw9lxzP20AMvGb+jIin7eHrdJU8+SydlhzvaUsiBFsSRFVGO O/Ojkd A2do+2PAn2jcjzJYI4t7e11L0udrqNxglJQ4pc9rBwLdngHuPQ I1M6jY3qBtB/jy ltCCZsUps01BTGZEPXGtY0VVeIUIiQ== =BAg7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- I don't know how anybody else feels about your PGP signatures, but I'll tell you how I feel. I hate them. They add nothing to your posts and just clutters them up. So I'd like to suggest that you stop incorporating them in your messages. +10 Rene |
#278
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
In article , Rene Lamontagne
wrote: On 2019-12-09 10:13 a.m., Ken Blake wrote: On 12/9/2019 6:01 AM, Dan Purgert wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 snip -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl3uRY wACgkQjhHd8xJ5 ooFuoQf9Gm6+HdDVp5FUcJIlcm8riecPzIq4r6IEZEmfejYII9 uq2WVvxz1E8DC/ qHzoGpJyHmzxKn/JuDwP34y5HxYE/BALC5V52B6ZT6NG+hHLeF7Lj0NE8Ddo2uQS xBLNecuVT2avDjgb9Ang/I9vUXpfd3PaKdHHY6Z7IPcjfYOk3NG7lXPt7Ho2Vm/j CBoni6Q/O7kw9lxzP20AMvGb+jIin7eHrdJU8+SydlhzvaUsiBFsSRFVGO O/Ojkd A2do+2PAn2jcjzJYI4t7e11L0udrqNxglJQ4pc9rBwLdngHuPQ I1M6jY3qBtB/jy ltCCZsUps01BTGZEPXGtY0VVeIUIiQ== =BAg7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- I don't know how anybody else feels about your PGP signatures, but I'll tell you how I feel. I hate them. They add nothing to your posts and just clutters them up. So I'd like to suggest that you stop incorporating them in your messages. +10 ^10 |
#279
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
In article , Ken Blake
wrote: | was ahead of Windows with graphics. They ended up having | a reputation for being superior for a long time. Long after | | IIRC, the reputation was well earned -- the M68k and later PPC chips had | better pipelines when it came to graphics processing than the Intel x86 | processors of the day. | Yes. But their reputation lasted far beyond that time, for no reason. Some years ago a graphics shop sued Apple after they bought Macs and found the display's top setting was only 18-bit color/ 260K colors, yet the menu selection for that setting was marked "millions of colors". Leave it to Apple to use cute slang to hide sleaze. But if they'd said "tons of colors" they might have protected themselves from a lawsuit. If I knew about that suit, I had forgotten it. Just curious--who won? And how much did they win? it wasn't a graphics shop. it was two photographers filing yet another frivolous case, where their own lawyer couldn't find people who were harmed by it, and ultimately it was dismissed. it's also not unique to apple. windows laptops also dithered. https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-settles-the-amazing-multicolor-lawsuit/ Few others seem to care, however; The Tribune said the plaintiffs' lawyer declined to take the case to the limits "because it was difficult to find other people who were wronged because they had bought Macs solely based on the 'millions of colors' claim." Terms of the settlement were not disclosed. A representative at the San Diego County Superior Court said the case was actually dismissed last year, and so it's not clear why this took so long to come to light. But the outcome is not all that surprising, and I'm left wondering if it took "millions of dollars" for this case to disappear. |
#280
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
On 12/9/19 5:04 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
Imo, the quality of the icon design has gone downhill over the last few years. Not just Apple, but every where. They are no longer visually intuitive. Were they ever though? I mean, about the only one that I can recall (ever) looking like what it's supposed to be is trash / recycle bin. There will never be a UI that is intuitive all users. Simply not possible. So icons need to be intuitive for the majority, or at least a number of groups. Take a look at the desktop icon for for File Manager from Windows 3.x: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Manager_(Windows) Now look at W10's icon for File Explorer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Explorer The purpose of File Manager/Windows Explorer/File Explorer is to organize your files on floppies or hard drive, thumb drive, etc. Which of those 2 icons do you think better represent where you are going to be working by referring to something you've seen in your life? Document icons used to have lines on them that indicated something in writing. A folder icon looked like a partially open folder with something inside, when that icon was selected or the folder was not empty. The icons were also large enough to be easily identifiable. Not the small things you see today. Your trash can example is so accurate. The icon used to look like a 33 gal. trash can. As opposed to the square with a triangle on top as was used by Gmail for some time. I've seen some icons that actually had the text as part of the icon. Everything else I can think of is either a logo of some sort that really doesn't mean anything (e.g. the "E" logo for IE, or the Chrome logo, etc.) Therein lies the problem. Icons are no longer intuitive. The more intuitive an icon is, the less explanation you need to use it. I wonder how many people deleted an email in Gmail using the icon I listed because it didn't look like a trash icon to them? Or even said Delete? We make computers more and more powerful, yet make them less intuitive, and look harder to use (should I say the W8 Start screen?), and then wonder why sales go down? This is not the only reason sales went down, but it has to contribute to it. Maybe I'm just too young for the meaningful logos Maybe so. LOL I predate icons. -- Ken MacOS 10.14.6 Firefox 70.0.1 Thunderbird 60.9 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#281
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256 Mayayana wrote: "Dan Purgert" wrote | I explored it a fair amount but ended up feeling that | it was a big time sucker. Everything changes. Everything | requires tweaking. | So, your basic progression of "new stuff changes". I mean, it's not like | Windows behaves the same as XP (or 7) these days. | Big difference. Microsoft is religious about backward compatibility. They provide support for 10 years and lots of docs. (Though the end-user docs are pretty bad.) Agreed on the enduser docs. Debian & RHEL are (IIRC) both in the 7-10 year support camps; although most typical distros stick to 5 year support cycles. I'm writing this on XP with OE6. Most software still works on XP. OE was just a half-baked afterthough. A default Most linux software (of sufficient age, of course) also works on EOL versions as well. Of course this may mean building from source (as Linux has used "app stores" for considerably longer than other OSes). email program. Yet OE6 is arguably better than current products despite being 18 years old. The program folder is 4 MB. TBird is 90 MB, stuffed with dotnet crap, but no help file in sight. Even the Mozilla people don't seem to have full docs for things like prefs. OK, but how much of the OE stuff is crammed "somewhere else"? I'm only asking, because I know that it's a little more "deeply integrated" than Tbird. Not that I think ~90MB is hiding out there. It's not difficult to write software that runs on all Windows versions -- backward and forward. That's like being able to write a program for current Linux and have it work on RedHat 4 seamlessly, with no additional support files or adjustments needed. Depends what the software is written in. I mean, as long as you're not relying on some library that isn't available in RHEL4, it's quite likely to work. Same with Windows, of course -- I mean, if I write something that relies on whatever the current dotnet is, it's probably not going to work in winXP. So, yes, stuff changes in Windows. Especially going from XP to Vista. That was a big jump. But the API didn't change. It was just added to. MS have to offer that kind of support because business requires it. While the Linux API has itself changed, I believe it is fairly consistent in that regard as well -- Linus is very adamant that the kernel devs do everything they can to not break userspace. Meanwhile, WINE took 20 years to get to v. 1, with updates every 10 days. It was a training camp for college students, not a professional piece of software. GIMP is similar. And that pretty much covers Linux software for people who are not programmers or scientists. I don't think their choice to not go to a v1.0 necessarily implies what you're trying to say it does. Especially when it comes to writing a compatibility layer for a closed-source system that has zero interest in actually allowing it... Linux support is typically 18 months. When I want to install anything it needs numerous updates of system files. Ridiculous stuff like 6.143.213.77 isn't good enough. It has to be 6.143.213.88. That sounds very much like your only experience is with either "rolling release" distros, or the "testing" releases of otherwise "stable" distros (such as the three "short-term" releases Ubuntu puts out between their 5-year-support "LTS" ones). Docs? If you're lucky it's a man page. Ask the programmer why there are no docs. The answer will probably be something like, "I don't like to write." They say that with diffident pride: "I'm a programmer, not a lackey!" Yeah, those types are awful people. The programmer is a 35 year old teenager who's anxious to get back to his video game where he's killed 1,723 bad guys since last Tuesday and he's hoping to break his own record of 1,947 killed by tomorrow. He's going to have to stay up all night eating candybars and ramen to pull it off. And you want docs?! Where's your sense of priorities, man?! ha, that sounds like my dad. Always disparaging what I did in my free time, regardless of how good my grades were, or how little "free time" I actually had between school / work / after-school stuff. "Oh, you're playing on the computer ~again~" (as I'm trying to learn to program, or whatever ... or yes, sometimes playing games). I actually came across something in WINE at one point suggesting that programmers should put comments into their code in a particular format. Those could later be auto-converted to a help file without having to actually write a help file. Any software sold for money has to be far more dependable and complete than that. It's probably something like doxygen. It's helpful, but not a silver bullet. | Nothing is simple because the people who use it like to feel like | coding commandos. | | I haven't run into that myself ... maybe I got lucky. | And you don't use console windows? Or end up digging Of course I do, it's cleaner & faster to get things done (FOR ME). But I was more commenting on not running into "coding commandos". down into /etc to change a program setting? Or maybe you just regard that as simple? In Windows it's been almost As opposed to C:/PROGRA~1 ? Ultimately they're both the start of hierarchies where you find config files. I do like not having to navigate through C:/PROGRA~1/PROGRAM/directories though (albeit, Win programs have gotten better in this regard too). completely unnecessary to open console windows since about 1995. The last time I did it was to swap out the HAL file from single core to multi-core version. I think winXP was the first version that didn't absolutely require some cmd.com magic in order to get *something* to work. But then again I played a lot of older DOS-based games back then, so that might've been a reason. | So everyone brags about using a "shell", by which they mean a console | window where they run DOS-esque commands. | | Which can be the "easier" approach (in terms of less effort on your | part) than using a GUI. Yes. Exactly the answer I'd expect from a Linux fan. It can be highly efficient as a scripting system, to do batch operations, but for normal computer use -- to copy a file, find system info, read help, list directory contents, and so on -- it makes no sense. Depends -- if I'm already in the terminal it may make more sense than opening new windows to navigate around. Not to mention if I'm only connected remotely (but that's its own case, of course). | Even the OS itself gets very limited support. | | This certainly depends on the distro you choose. Some are better than | others -- although if you're looking for "professional" support, that's | pretty much limited to Red Hat. | I don't mean personal support. I mean supporting their own product, so that necessary patches are available and software will run on it for many years, as with Windows. Many programmers use end of OS support as an excuse to end their support, so if a Linux version is only supported officially for 18 months then whatever you set up initially is "all she wrote". Once it no longer serves you'll have to start all over. Those short-term versions are, for lack of a better word, beta releases. Why should a developer support them after they've been dropped? Best way to think of them is akin to those trash versions of Windows (ME, Vista, 8...) that get released / everyone hates / replaced by better (XP, 7, 10) options. | | Didn't desktop publishing get it's start with Macs? | Probably. And graphics. But that was way back when Apple | | "Desktop Publishing" being a graphical environment? I think Xerox or | Sun was "first" in that regard. Apple just took it away from them | pretty quick (and the whole "IBM (clone) with MS Windows" thing didn't | really help anyone out). | He means being able to create your own printed documents without having to paste-up photostat copy. Ugh, yeah, that'd probably have been one of the later UNIX (probably some Xerox release) talking to a typesetter of some sort. Never was part of that -- the oldest I remember interacting with (and by proxy of "hey what's this thing?") is a mimeograph machine. Though I do know of the old photo-sensitive typeset machines. Desktop publishing was the new ability to actually print a finished product yourself. With high end equipment people could print a professional, finished product and cut the photostat people, the typesetters, and the printers out of the picture. Ah, see I was considering having a local operator of a typesetting machine to be a valid direction for "desktop publishing". But yeah, if the caveat is "printed directly to paper with either an inkjet or laser or whatever was available back then ... " | IIRC, the reputation was well earned -- the M68k and later PPC chips had | better pipelines when it came to graphics processing than the Intel x86 | processors of the day. | Yes. But their reputation lasted far beyond that time, for no reason. Some years ago a graphics shop sued Apple after they bought Macs and found the display's top setting was only 18-bit color/ 260K I had a similar thing with a friend (or friend-of-a-friend). But it came down to "yes, you _can_ get 24-bit color, if you get the high-end display... but you chose the downgrade to save $100" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl3uej 4ACgkQjhHd8xJ5 ooFteAf+MjFC3jK3FtBELwxaNux8IEls5nOrv6s3AQAuPMXWmL mqtquQaOvHa+ME nZ+fa9kyfj3QEtt2VIczDcxzKj4s2ALwezhHUCGUEOJ7UF42NE Iu55WclqRk7CNK 69NnO9S/10/ZV0NmCEvcx19YwUeitvt+Y/5EGWGamrK3yqTyIppem4U03wyaQa5g Yfier8EddI+zcnUCNCL4g7q3vmAXZOZeU39wstlQGTctWHLh5M VOoVy2h7YudL8R mCrgxEH52tWe9fIKYiqrouyqQQ30Yic5hrAWDFuEZk2cMRhGBV hS+ha/KzcbNN2X fq4knV8HI88JbmCNxrxpTsuHP/o+2w== =ZFH2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281 |
#282
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
On 12/9/2019 9:40 AM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 12/9/19 5:04 AM, Dan Purgert wrote: Imo, the quality of the icon design has gone downhill over the last few years. Not just Apple, but every where. They are no longer visually intuitive. Were they ever though? I mean, about the only one that I can recall (ever) looking like what it's supposed to be is trash / recycle bin. There will never be a UI that is intuitive all users. Simply not possible. So icons need to be intuitive for the majority, or at least a number of groups. Take a look at the desktop icon for for File Manager from Windows 3.x: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Manager_(Windows) Now look at W10's icon for File Explorer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Explorer The purpose of File Manager/Windows Explorer/File Explorer is to organize your files on floppies or hard drive, thumb drive, etc. Which of those 2 icons do you think better represent where you are going to be working by referring to something you've seen in your life? Document icons used to have lines on them that indicated something in writing. A folder icon looked like a partially open folder with something inside, when that icon was selected or the folder was not empty. The icons were also large enough to be easily identifiable. Not the small things you see today. Your trash can example is so accurate. The icon used to look like a 33 gal. trash can. As opposed to the square with a triangle on top as was used by Gmail for some time. I've seen some icons that actually had the text as part of the icon. I use the smallest icons possible on my desktop and task bar, to provide room for as many as possible. So, with a few exceptions, most of them are unrecognizable. For most, I rely much more on the test accompanying the icon. Could the icons be better designed to be more recognizable? For some, yes. For others, I can't think of how. But I hardly care. Again, I rely much more on the text accompanying the icon. -- Ken |
#283
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256 Mayayana wrote: "Dan Purgert" wrote | No. What I mean is that the basic English codepage includes | most Euro characters in the 128+ range. | | Sure, but that's not typically considered to be the "ASCII" characterset | anymore. At least as I recall, "ASCII" is only the characters contained | in the lower 128 bits (0x00 to 0x7f) of the larger "ANSI English" | character set (well, in Windows as codepage 1250 or something. As I | recall, ANSI never released anything after the draft -- it got rolled | into ISO8859) | I think there's an issue of terminology. I just posted an explanation to Carlos. The problem seems to be that few people know all the technical details and history. On Windows, there's no ASCII. It's all ANSI. Each character is a byte, not 7-bit. If you use any character above 127 it displays according to the local codepage. Yeah, I think I saw it. MSFT made the goof -- sticking with the draft-ANSI codepage (uh, 1250?) which got killed off in favor of ISO-8859. As I recall, ASCII characters were "only" 7-bit, because saving one bit per character in the days of 300-baud modems was beneficial. But again, memory is fuzzy -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl3ue6 wACgkQjhHd8xJ5 ooEJUQgAkIZgK9MglP9RnyFGUYEbzUn28zuLcMfxA6mvUZaJyl HAoXjkhBUm/NwB wXfAaj+riZxak4CZ3IsPpjGtoH0JLvJrL6caRQ96Igp86AGNGG haxxjZwpFy9CEj trmV2fEyPLWO6QogqVSw3Q1/BJ5uSE1pyAOZYot9B6RN15oAMslegUrlXlmnhc1n RcNsd54G4AxGsgbGJOLZm053sw+f8iz/vtDioEciq1Ai6jOsGoSmjMwfSJDszF/Q 7W7Luc0cFw8062TOXEa29/hO4NaEOMag48UzBIEMn4cCMBm81APnjqwGhyUumApP dw/pSowVD6kZbdn3Jem15ol0Ko8YoQ== =qGQW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281 |
#284
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
On 12/9/19 7:11 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"Dan Purgert" wrote | I explored it a fair amount but ended up feeling that | it was a big time sucker. Everything changes. Everything | requires tweaking. | So, your basic progression of "new stuff changes". I mean, it's not like | Windows behaves the same as XP (or 7) these days. | Big difference. Microsoft is religious about backward compatibility. They provide support for 10 years and lots of docs. (Though the end-user docs are pretty bad.) Does this include the new support policy as stated he https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/...cle-fact-sheet snip Linux support is typically 18 months. When I want to install anything it needs numerous updates of system files. Ridiculous stuff like 6.143.213.77 isn't good enough. It has to be 6.143.213.88. What about the Linux distros that are "Long Term Support"? snip -- Ken MacOS 10.14.6 Firefox 70.0.1 Thunderbird 60.9 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#285
|
|||
|
|||
7 Best Alternatives To Microsoft Office Suite - 2019 Edition
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256 Ken Blake wrote: On 12/9/2019 6:01 AM, Dan Purgert wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 snip -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl3uRY wACgkQjhHd8xJ5 ooFuoQf9Gm6+HdDVp5FUcJIlcm8riecPzIq4r6IEZEmfejYII9 uq2WVvxz1E8DC/ qHzoGpJyHmzxKn/JuDwP34y5HxYE/BALC5V52B6ZT6NG+hHLeF7Lj0NE8Ddo2uQS xBLNecuVT2avDjgb9Ang/I9vUXpfd3PaKdHHY6Z7IPcjfYOk3NG7lXPt7Ho2Vm/j CBoni6Q/O7kw9lxzP20AMvGb+jIin7eHrdJU8+SydlhzvaUsiBFsSRFVGO O/Ojkd A2do+2PAn2jcjzJYI4t7e11L0udrqNxglJQ4pc9rBwLdngHuPQ I1M6jY3qBtB/jy ltCCZsUps01BTGZEPXGtY0VVeIUIiQ== =BAg7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- I don't know how anybody else feels about your PGP signatures, but I'll tell you how I feel. I hate them. They add nothing to your posts and just clutters them up. So I'd like to suggest that you stop incorporating them in your messages. Your request has been noted. Please feel free to killfile me if the 12 lines are causing you that much heartache. HAND -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl3ugC 4ACgkQjhHd8xJ5 ooFSdwf+KJapfovl5dthVXlj2X0GOKNvK4zOWD3A74X+N4Cmrh fJjdPOAVLL8Skp r/QKgGNrigWrbZFpeBq7Ea3nvz+UYIbkV4AWGZgGsUsio46F/wvME+XgGQboc6Ei oFXlLKMiDy82WFJPu7fZrN5bxgsz9quYypi5PCikdl1BLopb/+0ved4X1K7JMwy2 siscsTBfrR8CEY7i10zhzZUBp+M+ykJYPCTBqonfFRYHiyb6TG rO1rb6Y0UCNA4L L8yNn3VJaz2UbHiWu7JYstf73pOoB/r8SfWShq7Tl6gk+LiZipqzOW5XRlAY40Tc mgfYvtzGzn5IpSjuqUIP4uBckswrCw== =v8H1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|