Depends what you do. Office 97 was horrible by today's standard as it didn't deal with many content types which made creating marketing documents a nightmare. Open Office is fine but it too has it's limitations. As I stated in an earlier post, you can't put all users in the same basket, if you could then MS wouldn't sell any office software.

Buying software is like buying a car. You buy it for your needs. Open office and equivalent are great and they offer a basic feature set that suits most users at home and many users in business like environments. Last I checked it has macro support and many other minor extensions to expand it's feature set.

Then you have those who need to extend the basic functionality or integrate it with their services. MS Office offers a huge lineup of integration with its own product as well as products developed by 3rd parties. If that's what you business needs then the cost is just a minor bump in the road that usually is justified with efficiency gains, reductions in errors, redundancy and better organization. For those who don't understand how MS office can help you achieve the aforementioned you can go read the feature list.

You can calm down bud. It's a forum and we both are speaking our opinions. You have your opinion and that fine but that doesn't mean most agree with you.

You suggest the survey is flawed but you have no proof of this. In my business circle most feel the same way I do especially after I put the arguments on the table. Putting aside intellectual property and sales leads, you still can't control your customer's opinion of Snowden. If you own a McDonald, your customers don't give a crap about who works there but if you are a security consultant with potential access to company information that is a different story.

A company like Google could potentially twist it in their favour but not everybody has a strong position in the business world like they do.

You can choose to disagree for yourself but keep in mind that not everybody agrees with you.

It doesn't stifle creative output if you look at the true definition of creativity but that's aside the point. My point is that copyright didn't prevent people from coming up with new content. I'm sure it slowed it down but what do we care, we have enough to go around ten times. Let the dicks be dicks about their copyrights.

There cannot be a baseline to compare with. People create plenty of content regardless of these copyright laws. It's only a problem when it makes it big and when it does there's enough money for all to share regardless of it being right to have to share. The bigger problem is how broad the copyright is, not the length. If I release work containing ABBBB AA BB today and a year from now you release work containing AA BB in it, I can potentially go after you for copyright infringement.

Maybe you live in a mythical world where your imagination allows you to create arguments using rare occurrences. I mean if we are going to use exceptions to asses the situation then I don't know what to tell you. BTW, not only school zones require 40km/h zones. There are plenty of residential areas where kids are present in numbers that justify 40km/h as a deterrent for speeding since the fines are high.

Yes it was but some did believe and push that agenda. Regardless there are other examples like earth being the center of the universe...

There are some today that still push the idea that we never landed on the moon.

History of the Wright brothers. And it wasn't the first time they were told this.
Wilbur told Orville on the train ride back to Dayton, "Not within a thousand years would man ever fly."

Explain because as far as I recall it cost a lot more energy to keep the vehicle above ground than it does to power a 1000 HP truck engine and that doesn't include the thrust you need to go forward, turn and stop.

Re: self driving cars:
http://www.bloomberg.com/slide...
http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/28/...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

Neither did I but you can't deny the need for speed limits.

Here's a link to an actual survey that said only 19% would hire him. This is a poll done with employers that would be the most interested in his skillset based on the industry they serve.
http://www.bizjournals.com/was...

I am a business man and I wouldn't hire him. Why? Because I can't trust he won't leak intellectual properly or customer list to my competitors. If a man can leak information about his country and be willing to face death, what is he willing to do to get rich where the risk is much less? What about my company's reputation should my customers find out he works for me? After all, I don't control their opinion of Snowden and I may lose their trust in the process.

Funny, he lied on his application regarding his education. Although I wouldn't condemn him for doing so it is still a great argument against your statement.

100 times much? I wonder how much entertainment we can fit in our days considering how unsuccessful entertainment is currently supported by successful entertainment.

And I guess in you world growth means nothing. In my world growth is a sign of progress and clearly the copyright law haven't stopped the progress in the entertainment industry.

I at least provided numbers that point towards progression, you showed no number to indicate regression.

There more science to it then you think. See this link. It's just one example of many available for the different states and jurisdictions. http://www.wceo.us/pages/How-S...

Pay attention to this part:
85th percentile speed
The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85 percent of the motorists drive on a given road when unaffected by slower traffic or poor weather. This speed indicates the speed that most motorists on that road consider safe and reasonable under ideal conditions. This used as an aid to set the appropriate speed limit for that road.

Look at this part in the link I sent you: Correlation between speed limits and crashes

I'll tell you what. The day we manage to enlighten people to not use cell phones while driving (hands on obviously!!), then screw the speed limits but until then, let the authorities assist these people through signage.

IMO you have too much faith in drivers around you and too little in the people making decisions based on need.

Really? They actually set limits in 2007 due to safety reasons. They are just looking at opening up the limits on highways. They currently are trialing and it appears successful for this perfect highway. All the ingredients are in place for success in this case. Similar to the autobahn but as you can imagine you can't plaster the same logic across all roads. Keep in mind that the autobahn does have speed limits for bad weather conditions. Why do you think?

Earth was supposed to be flat, we weren't supposed to go on the moon and flight was never going to become an important method of transportation. Yet here we are and none of those statements are true anymore. Flying cars aren't convenient so its no wonder nobody researched it. As for self driving cars, they are already here. There are already plenty of working prototypes and legislation is in the process of being adjusted for the future. Most people just want a means to get to destination so mainstream isn't you and me who love driving. It's the other people that will decide for us.

Maybe for non tech users but as a tech user it's a must that adds little to no cost to the laptop. I guess you could use a USB Ethernet adapter if it's required. Service people often have to hookup to a device directly to get diagnostic data (this is true of many products including the one my company offers).

I personally use a storage device and external mouse at all time when using a laptop. Add the need to hookup to a projector via USB for a presentation and you now need 3 ports.

2 ports IMO is the minimum because I carry a self powered DVD drive which is convenient for the times a DVD or CD is needed (Rare occurrence these days)

The wiki pretty much points in the direction that more speed = more injuries and fatalities. I didn't need the wiki to tell me that since it's just common sense (Stopping distance is greater at higher speed hence the reduced time available to react).

And is big foot real too? Conspiracy theories are great for discovery channel but in the real world real people like me and you make decisions based on information available. Accident stats combined with speed monitor stats are the best tools they have access to at the moment.

There's nothing logical about that statement. I'm pretty sure you're smart enough to know why.

I won't argue that some roads aren't marked properly (after all humans make mistakes) and I won't argue that lower speeds can result in boredom (although I get the same boredom at 120km/h when driving straight for a long time). I'd like to see a link to that study as I've never heard of it.

Considering how most countries have the same strategy towards speed limits I'd say things are probably in better shape than you think they are.

Fact is that in 30 years this will no longer be a topic of discussion as self driving cars will dictate the speed, not the driver.

NAILED IT!

IMO you should just avoid both.

Although aspartame can provide benefits to those with diabetes since it increases the production of insulin.

Do you believe in factual numbers?

If so, don't take my word for it. In some countries they tried to apply higher limits and even unlimited speeds (such as the autobahn) and ended up reversing their decision. Look at the effectiveness section of this wiki. It paints a pretty clear picture of the direct impact of increase speed limits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

That's incorrect. That are plenty of disputes on copyrights less than 30 years old.

Good for you for being trusting but I can assure you that many business owners don't feel the same.