Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Microsoft to Split into Four Groups? 217

An anonymous reader wrote in to say "ZDNet is reporting that Microsoft is going to announce next week that it is splitting into four separate groups. Maybe we'll see Office for Linux after all..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft to Split into Four Groups?

Comments Filter:
  • This sounds Microsoft wants to take us back to the days of Ye Olde Mainframe. Funny. This was the computing model that he was up against in the early days of the PC. Yeah, it stands for Personal Computing. And now he wants a "Megaserver"? Lets look at Bill's other shining example of this kind of computing: WindowsNT. Trust everyones important data to an NT server? Riiiiight....

    Of course it's in Mircosoft's interests to promote this kind of system:

    • No more worries about pirated software- nothing can hide from the megaserver!
    • Guess where your web cache is stored kiddies? "The better to taylor banner ads, um i mean content for you."
    • If they control the server, then they can control the communications protocol ("I know", they say, "we can make a new, better [TCPIP/HTTP/SMTP/etc]") that is used... and effectively exclude Mac, linux, all who dont use windows! "Welcome to Microsoft Internet 2000"

    Furthermore, this silly scheme is the antithesis of all the the Internet is or aspires to be: it will not suffer such an attempt at centralization! I say when MS eventually looses the DoJ case, as part of the punishment they should be denied the Internet. Strip them of their domain, MSN, and IE!

  • My workplace decided to go the Microsoft way, and ever since it's been a headache. So many people have not all that complicated macros and functions in say Lotus 123, but Excel either does not have that function, or has implemented it in a terribly goofy way. If an office package can be made and made well, it's be great for Linux. I just don't see that coming in from the MS camp.
  • > Personally, I dont see why people want web based
    > email. Any self-respecting computer that can
    > give you web access should give you telnet.

    But, in the interests of security, what about my server, where we only allow shell access from certain IP addresses? If I'm travelling, and my laptop gets fried, or my pilot gets smashed, or whatever, I can go to ANYone with net access and check my mail. No problem.

    I don't use it as my main account (it's a pain in the ass) but HoTMaiL is definitely good insurance. :)
    -- Memorandum --
    From: Bill Gates
    To: All borg
    Re: Microsoft Corporation "Divide and Conquer" Regrouping Plan

    Here are the groups I intend to split M$ into.

    1) Marketing
    2) Sales
    3) Lying
    4) Ripping off other people's concepts

    So basically, just stay where you are and keep doing what you're doing. Sales should not attempt to sell to the marketing, lying, or rip-off teams, however.


  • They are just reorganizing their people into new departments so that they will be organized by function from the customer's perspective vs organization by product. For example all the developers together and all support people together vs all windows nt people together and all ofice people together.

    Seems like this reinforces integration not hinders it.
  • It's just a reorganization. Suits do that. Doesn't mean shit. They'll shuffle some organization charts and job titles around, and fire some people, and everyone else'll keep doing what they've been doing all along.
  • because whether it's running on Windows, Mac, or (God forbid) my toaster, it's big, it's bloated, it's slow, and it overwhelms you with unnecessary JUNK we all you want to do is print your stupid resume or make a simple chart from a series of numbers. I _hate_ it in all its forms.
  • Group 1: Caffiene
    Group 2: Grease
    Group 3: Sugar
    Group 4: Monosodium Glutamate

  • Posted by Mike@ABC:

    Folks, this has been a long time coming, and has been reported on before. This gives MS a couple of things. It lets them focus more on the interactive/Web side, where they're still trying to figure out how this whole Internet thing works, and it gives the DOJ a blueprint for divvying up the company along product lines. If indeed Microsoft is going to be broken up (which is possible, though far from likely), Microsoft would prefer to split along product lines.

    Just my two cents. Take it or leave it.
  • Posted by Steve Linberg:

    I will use Office for Linux if, and only if, Microsoft open-sources it so I can inspect and build it myself. With all of the latest revelations of the prodigious privacy violations by MS and its software, I just don't trust them anymore, period.

    And since the odds of MS open-sourcing Office are, in the (approximate) words of Berke Breathed, "about the same as those of Reagan handing Nancy over to Bruce Springsteen's roadies," I don't think Office will ever make it to my Linux box.

    Steve Linberg, Systems Programmer &c.
    National Center on Adult Literacy, University of Pennsylvania

  • Posted by AnnoyingMouseCoward:

    The term "Troll" comes from "Dungeons&Dragons" role playing games. Specifically, a "Troll" is an almost indestructible creature with great strength.

    Because of this, "Trolls" became popular as characters for individuals who wish to engage in minless mayhem. On the internett, "Troll" means "someone who deliberatly starts a flame war".

    So no - you definatly arn't a Troll.

    As to your comments about "Linux Rules/Microsoft Sucks!", well, on that point I will say only this. A lot of us have to work with M$ products in our daytime jobs and alternate OS's ( like Linux ) are just something that we do as a hobby.

    Because of this, I'm a fully paid up, card carrying member of the "We hate Microsoft" brigade. When you spend long hours at night and on the weekend trying to find your way around some bug in an M$ product, a certain amount of rancour and intolerance is inevitable. In short, you take it *very* personally simply because it directly impacts on your own personal life ( or lack thereof because your too busy patching around bugs to have a life of your own ).

    So while I certainly agree with you that OS bloat has pushed processor development much faster than it would otherwise have gone, I would ask that you keep in mind that my hatred and loathing of M$ is not a matter of fashion, but rather the direct effect that M$'s marketing practices have had on my life.

    Likewise with my advocacy of Linux and other open source OS's. There is nothing new about what M$ is doing - IBM did the same all through the 1980's when I was at university and during my first few years as a commercial programmer.

    To me, open source systems are the only way that we can concievably break us out of this viscious cycle. Why re-invent a propriatory wheel all the time? Why not just use a standard wheel? This is why I have very little patience for closed source OS's ( such as MS-Windows or OS/2 ). To me, M$ isn't the problem, but the whole propriatory mind-set that it seeks to foster.

    So while Linux isn't perfect, it's currently the flag-ship of the open source movement and the OS that I support. Call me immature if you like, but

    "Linux Rulz!/M$ Sux!"

    And no, I'm not going to flame you. You haven't been deliberatly rude or offensive, so it's not required.
  • I thought they were pulling out all the stops to get it out this fall. Does anybody have some more info on this?
  • actually if you bothered to read the artcile, its Ballmer that created the plan. I'm sure it's just because of this trial...I personally hope their stock dwindles to nothin and they vanish from earth...we can always hope.
  • I get the two confused, but when the oil company was split up, it turned out that the CEO was bringing in more money.

    I'm sure this line of thought has already been posted at some earlier point on /.

    Misfit - Member of the department of redundance department
  • I hated it.

    No, not what you wrote, but the scenario.. ..because it just makes sense.

  • Most people I know use HotMail as a dumping ground for spam from their USENET postings. They really don't use their HotMail email adress for serious mail.
  • People need to deal with wankers like you insisting on spreading data encoded in the very latest version of Bill's pay-ware far and wide. Any assertion beyond that simple practical reality is dubious at best.

    MSOffice is hardly the pinnacle of either the spreadsheet or wordprocessor.

  • Why is it that EVERY picture of steve balmer looks as though it was designed to make him look like a blithering idiot? You'd think they would want to project an image of .... i dont know... something besides the 'Duuuh Yup! I'm the pres.' image that all of the pictures i've seen of him make him look like.

    I'm constantly amazed that I live in a society in which a company like that can take control of so much of the worlds business and finance.

  • Hopefully any initiative along these lines will be constructed a bit more reliably than your 20-year-old mainframe. We have the technology now to keep services running essentially continuously for years at a time so I don't see reliability as a major detraction assuming this is implemented correctly.

    It'd certainly be nice to go over to a friend's house and have access to the same applications and information as I do at home or at work. Forget synchronization.

    Though, of course I'm speaking about my Windows apps. I can already use an X server at work or at a friend's house to get at all of my apps and information on the Linux side of things, but this doesn't extend into my "real world" work (where I need access to NT apps/data).
  • No more worries about pirated software- nothing can hide from the megaserver!

    This is bad?

    Guess where your web cache is stored kiddies? "The better to taylor banner ads, um i mean content for you."

    Of course, you're making the assumption that temporary files like browser caches (assuming they even exist) will exist on the server-side. Wouldn't a simple proxy be more efficient? A web cache is designed to be super-fast (pulling from the local disk). A server lookup wouldn't be any more of a gain than any proxy would.

    Also, don't judge an idea based upon what an evil mind MIGHT be able to do if it were POSSIBLE that he were allowed to do it. It's possible for credit card companies to monitor your purchases and sell your name and address to targeted vendors for junk mail. It's possible for your ISP to monitor which newsgroups you read and send the information about your porn tastes to various X-rated junk mail firms. It's possible to do a great many things in the world today but you don't see it happening. Why? Because it's not in the company's best interests to do so. The resulting PR mess and the number of customers who would switch to a competitor would make the prospects seem very bad for a company trying to abuse information it has access to. Microsoft is no difference, except they seem a bit bolder. Don't judge them for something they haven't done yet.

    If they control the server, then they can control the communications protocol

    I agree that having an open standard and open protocols would definitely be a good thing. If they do keep everything proprietary, though, it won't be too difficult to figure out. After all, look at ICQ and the number of Linux clones. I don't believe they had much of a real standard to go upon until someone did a bit of packet snooping. Also, this "Megaserver" idea seems especially well-suited for multiple platforms. It would be a shame to limit their customers to only those that are running a PC with Windows or an appliance with WindowsCE.
  • I am SOOO sick of the OS bigots on Slashdot.

    The loud, uneducated majority (IRC script kiddies, high school Unix admin wananbes, college Unix admin wannabes and the mentally disturbed), or more affectionately, the "slashdot sheep", are all about killing the big-bad, evil (insert noun of the day here, ex. Microsoft), castrating those that oppose the (insert noun of the day here, ex. GPL), and touting (insert noun of the day here, ex. Linux) as the complete, should-be-used-everywhere-by-all-people-at-all-tim es solution for all the world's problems, along with its O Holy Creator, (insert name of the day here, ex. Linus).

    The relatively silent, educated minority, affectionately referred to as the Real People with Real Jobs doing Real Things that actually Make A Difference, know that it all boils down to using the best tool for the task.

    Let me say that again:

    It all boils down to using the best tool for the task.

    For my Unix, WWW, CGI, SQL, etc. development, I will work on my Linux box using my vi text editor, Apache web server and copy of mySQL. Why? Because I'm familiar with those tools and they are ideally suited for my work environment and habits. For my graphics, work e-mail, XML and stylesheet development, I use my NT system, Photoshop, Outlook and Internet Explorer. Yes, I have to reboot my NT machine every week or two. Yes, applications occasionally crash. My lost productivity there more than makes up for the productivity I've gained by taking advantage of these Microsoft products to get my job done. There are no suitable equivalents available under Linux. (And for every Linux alternative you mention, I'm going to offer you several reasons why it's inferior, not as productive as its MS counterpart, or why the MS version is better suited to my needs or work environment.)

    The bottom line: All you sheep looking for a cause to fight for, stop thinking with your single uneducated, paranoid, immature collective virtual "brain" and start thinking with the gooey one between your ears. A hear a lot of, "You're a Microsoft guy. Open your mind up a little bit to other alternatives," when you OS bigots are guilty of exactly the same thing: closed-mindedness. It's not about what's cool and "making a stand". It's about using the best tools for the task at hand. Grow up.
  • More accurately, the amount of time invested in using one product can be considered an advantage of that product when comparing it to something new. If the new product is overwhelmingly better, people will switch.

    This is true, but do you know of any Office suites that can truthfully be classified as "overwhelmingly better" than MS Office? I can't. I've used 'em all, and nothing beats Word or Excel for the tasks they're designed for. And what about Powerpoint? Is there even a Linux alternative for that, much less an "overwhelmingly better" one?
  • The paper-clip guy - I would like to smash his head in.

    It's pretty trivial to disable this.

    When I'm using variables in a document (ie i) and it makes them uppercase.

    It's pretty trivial to disable this.

    When it tries to format lists for me, but always does it wrong

    It's pretty trivial to disable this.

    When it stops responding for 4-5 minutes while it talks to NT 'bout something

    Sounds like you have more serious problems. Occasionally Word will take advantage of the "auto save" feature to avoid lost data (trivial to disable). That's the only thing I can imagine that it would be doing. A four to five minute lock-up is an indication of a much more serious problem. I would consider checking the disk surface of your drive for errors and running some generic system health tests. Naturally, a decent-speed CPU and a good amount of RAM would be the first thing I'd check. If you're using an application with anything below the recommended system specifications, you're asking for problems like this. You might also try closing any other major applications that you may have open, because each one uses its own share of memory, as I'm sure you're aware. Of course, I'm assuming you're not exaggarating by your 4-5 minute delay. I've never seen that before.

    When it tries to autocorrect my spelling as I type

    It's pretty trivial to disable this.

    In general, anytime it tries to think for me

    In general, most of Word's "intuitive" features are trivially disabled.

    Don't bash a product because you lack the competance to configure it correctly. I mean come on, it's a Windows app. Point and click. It's not like you're having to edit a .mswordrc file.

  • Microsoft's software, which they presumably are going to use as the basis for the central server, is about 2-3 orders of magnitude less reliable than that "20-year-old mainframe", based on uptime figures. And the central server is only one part of the reliability chain, a failure in a router or network hub will take down the system even if both the server and the client system are running perfectly.

    Then this "Megaserver" venture will fail and Microsoft will lose money. Microsoft operating systems tend to be unreliable. You know it, I know it, and most everyone at Microsoft knows it (though they aren't going to say so). Since everybody knows that implementing this "Megaserver" thing with out-of-the-box Microsoft solutions will result in an unreliable and unstable "Megaserver", logic dictates that a better solution will be devised to ensure reliability and data integrity.

    If they build this thing using known unreliable software, it will fail. They know this, which is precisely why a better solution will be (or has already been) devised. Microsoft's business tactics may be questionable, and their consumer products tend to be unreliable, but they're not a stupid company, and they do have some intelligent programmers in their pay. I haven't seen any real problems with that Terraserver lately, for example.
  • Oh come on, are you trying to tell me you are unable to locate the place where these preferences are defined? This isn't difficult, folks. It's point-and-click. If you honestly cannot locate the Preferences section in Word where these items are configured, you have some more serious problems.

    I think you're just feeling bitter because I'm actually committing Slashdot-blasphemy by actually *defending* Microsoft. Yes, I'm defending them. I don't like them and I think their products tend to be unstable and bloated, but dammit, I'll defend anyone that's being mislabeled and flamed unfairly. Get over it.
  • but I tend to use keyboard commands and shortcuts very often, and the problem is probably due to the fact that I grew up with WP5.1 for dos, and haven't been able to unlearn it.

    I'm sure this is it.. Word has keyboard shortcuts of its own, and I'm sure any die-hard Word user (which I am not) would say they had similar difficulties converting to WordPerfect.

    I actually don't know how to make an uneven 3 column document with differing widths.

    I'm not stupid either, the argument of point and click is worthless because the complexity is above point and click.

    Forgive me for sounding condescending, but I guess I left out "drag" when I said "point and click". In Word, there's a ruler bar across the top with things like your table edges marked off. To adjust your widths, just drag those marks to the left or the right. Depending on how you've set your toolbars up, creating visible borders on one or multiple edges of a table cell is as easy as selecting the cell and clicking on the toolbar button that most closely matches your desired outline type. I'm sure WordPerfect has just as much functionality, but they just approach it entirely differently, which is why you might be having a hard time with it in Word. This is to be expected, and I don't feel it's a failing of the product. One should not criticize product X because its behavior differs from product Y. (I'm not saying you were or anything, but others are.)

    I've personally created pamphlets, brochures and flyers using Word without much difficulty. I had to learn the terminology and what a few of those obscure Word features were for in the process, but again, this is to be expected, and I doubt it'd be any easier in any other Office suite.

    Though you're right, Word (or any other word processor for that matter) isn't well suited for certain tasks. I've had to use PageMaker when building full-color magazine advertisements, for example.

    It's all about using the best (most efficient/productive) tool for the task.

  • You may wish to have a 3-hour-long installation process for MS Word, but most people don't. Word comes pre-configured with some very typical, fair defaults. Most people want the features that are enabled by default to be enabled for the lifetime of that installation. You are in the minority by wishing any of those individual features disabled (or enabled) contrary to the default preferences.

    Your aerospace professor may be damn intelligent when it comes to aerospace, but your comment merely tells me that he simply does not read manuals. I bet he had problems following directions back in college.

    I remember a thread a while back about how Microsoft was evil (again) *because* these MS Office products were "dumbing down" the general population, making things so intuitive and easy that the people using the applications didn't have to be smart. It saddens me that you people do not know how to perform the simplest of configuration tasks under Word.

    I've used Word perhaps 20-30 times in my life, for, say, a cumulative 8-10 hours. I haven't touched Word for the last 9 months, but I have no doubt in my mind that I can open it up now and locate the preferences in question in under 30 seconds.
  • Answer?
    M$ got where it is through the ubiquity (every-where-ness) of dos. It was a tacit conspiracy between M$ and the user community. M$ said "hey, you big corporate users, you better be licensed!" and at the same time left basic DOS unprotected when everyone else (competition) had pro-lok and dongles and god knows what else. They KNEW dos would spread like a virus. They KNEW win 3.1 would, too. Win 95, they were taking some measures (remember the registration wizard uproar?) But backed off. Serendipity time. Made them even richer by allowing the pirating of W95.
    They were gonna be a de fucking facto fucking standard, dammit! Piracy was their secret partner, regardless of the protestations of fearless leader.
    To be serious for a sec, M$ attempted to do the impossible; to specify a generation of IT needs and processes apriori. These things must grow organically.
    It's sorta like spec'ing out a life form's DNA without the benefit of evolution (the ultimate OSS project. Worked rather well for me. Don't like my nose, though. Wish I had a pull-down for that.))
    Open Source is the ONLY way this high minded project stuff can work effectively. Try to plan it from on high, and the leader and his followers all tend to get psychotic. Only a cult can get a big enough gathering of people together to make the illusion seem real. Gates got a small cadre' to believe. They had a narcissistic, bill- centered vision to build, and to hell with truth.
    To finalise...

    They almost made it!
    :cue bwahaha;
    Guess who's singing dat tune now, eh?


  • Never is a long time...

  • Just to be clear, people need office software. I don't dispute this.

    But Microsoft doesn't design their office software to help people be more productive. They design their office software to sell a lot of copies. These goals sometimes overlap, but not always, and sometimes come into conflict.

    Nobody would want to learn to use another office product if he/she has been using one for years, regardless of how smooth the transition can be.

    This is a gross oversimplification. More accurately, the amount of time invested in using one product can be considered an advantage of that product when comparing it to something new. If the new product is overwhelmingly better, people will switch. Otherwise, we'd all still be using paper and pen, right?

  • I've submitted countless number of OS/2-related articles over the past year or so, and NONE of them ever get published. Slashdot will post the most useless and significant articles about Linux, but even the biggest OS/2 news of the year gets discarded.

    Slashdot should remove the banner "News for nerds" and replace it with "News for Linux users". At least that way, they won't be deceiving anyone.

    Timur Tabi
    Remove "nospam_" from email address
  • Here's an unsolicited testimony from a M$ user, from over at zdnet somewhere...

    Name: Judith (Jill) S. xxx
    Location: Lancaster, PA
    Occupation: Cresative MS product User

    "As an "at home" user of MS Products, I hate to see the continuity of product and services broken into divisions. I think those, inclucing the Justice Department are crybabies and whiners and predict that no matter how many so called divisions Microsoft is split into eventually those divisions will again blow away the competition. Business is business! Bill Gates has proven that he is not only exceptionally bright, but also prosesses the necessary qualities of a ruthless businessman. He is unique! I have been delighted with every Microsoft product I have ever bought. . . . . . "

    brought it over, just to balance the discussion here ;-)


  • god!
    how do you type all that in this tiny little box?

  • I agree with the CDE, KDE, and StarOffice indictment, but I don't see how Applix is bloated.

    As long as each individual is facing the TV tube alone, formal freedom poses no threat to privilege.
  • I would hate to see them break up. That would just tear my heart to see many little msnopolies fighting to dominate, rather than just one big dinasour left to die on its own.

  • Bruce Springsteen's roadies. The poor old sot...
    Too bad for the roadies though...

    I do agree that you can't trust any software that you did not build your self.

  • trivially disable those annoying features.
    Instead he invites you to turn on more annoying features.

    I recently read somewhere that the future is with leaner apps that have only the essential features so they can run on wearable computers. I believe that freed software has the best chance of implementing the new paradigm. M$ and all the other proprietary vendors are too busy enforcing the status quo to innovate much of anything except cramming another exotic feature down our throats.


  • Obviously M$ fears a remedy that would split the company along product lines - something that many of us have long thought necessary to promote open interfaces to their OS. With the cozy relationship between the OS and apps groups M$ has been able to use undocumented API calls to the OS in their apps. This just one of the unfair advantages the have created for their developers.

    This reorg means that M$ realizes that they have lost the federal anti-trust trial. Now that M$ is in a defensive posture, they begin to lose their competive edge. It will be interesting to see what remedies the US DOJ requires the software behemoth from Redmond to implement.

    These are interesting times.

  • This is true, but do you know of any Office suites that can truthfully be classified as "overwhelmingly better" than
    MS Office? I can't. I've used 'em all, and nothing beats Word or Excel for the tasks they're designed for. And
    what about Powerpoint? Is there even a Linux alternative for that, much less an "overwhelmingly better" one?

    Aboslutely there are better Office packages out there. I've been using WordPerfect Suite since the blue-screen days it was a lonely wordprocessor. I watched the Suite build up around it, and each time I compared it to the contemporary MSOffice, I found WP several steps ahead. So why isn't everyone using Wordperfect? They used to before Win3.1, but MS withheld vital programming information from other companies until Win3.1 was released, surprisingly in parallel with MSOffice for Windows. So WP had a six-month lag between the release of Win31/MSOffice, and managers in the meantime snapped over to MS because they feared "being behind".

    Each time I take a look at Word, however, I find myself searching for features I'm used to in WordPerfect and just not finding them in Word. (Reveal codes, shadow cursor, and so forth). There used to be a tabulted comparison of Wordperfect 8.0 and the latest MSOffice. Sadly, that site is down, and I never saved it (thought I did). But, it showed how limited Word was compared to WordPerfect. Businesses aren't going to use what's better because those decisions aren't made by people with any critical thinking skills. Rather, the managers will cave to peer pressure just like they did in HS and college, being nothing more than sheep following the curve.

  • Bloated Apps? ok, Well remove Applix, StarOffice, CDE, KDE...
  • I think perhaps you're taking things a wee bit too seriously... I know it's fun to compare Bill Gates to Hitler and the like, but really, he's just a sleazy businessman. No more, no less.

    10 - 50 years from now, there's still going to be closed, proprietary software. There's still going to be GPL'd and BSD'd software (or similar). There's still going to be good software (both proprietary and open) and there's still going to be bad software (both proprietary and open).

    There will still be people making a lot of money by screwing over the little guy, and there will still be a bunch of insecure, teen-age egotists pissing all over each other in forums like these.

    Mark Fassler
    fassler at frii dot com
  • I'll grant you what I said was a bit harsh... I did read your post seriously and not as a joke... I just feel like a lot of people put too much importance to free software - yeah what RMS does is important to the world - what I do (and prolly what most ppl do) affects pretty much just me and the people I come into contact with. I get annoyed when people put things into "biblical" proportions... But, like you said, it was a joke, and I misread it.

    Mark Fassler
    fassler at frii dot com
  • That is one butt ugly motherfucker. Can some Gimp enabled soul please borgify his ass, like the /. pic of Gates?

    • Information Services
    • Information Retrieval
    • Information Dispersal
    • Central Services

    (just like in Brazil)

  • I would not, not for all the money in the world, want to look like that fat-no chin-disgusting pockmarcked Goring fucking look-alike.

    Not to mention to make his salary you pretty much would have to be just as much of an asshole as he is.

  • that's his real name
  • As a technical writer who's obliged to use the corporate standard -- you guessed it, M$ Office -- I feel I speak for tens of thousands of tech writers everywhere when I say this:

    Bill Gates, FIX THE DAMN MASTER DOCUMENT FEATURE IN WORD!!! It sucks. It doesn't act as documented, and it EATS documents! Word absolutely, completely SLURPS OUT LOUD when it comes to producing manual-length documents.

    Bill, I sure hope somebody shows you this rant.

    OK. Whew. I feel better. Sorry, folks....
  • Another reason Word appears to be "talking" to the OS in the background could be that the Fast Find feature is enabled. Basically, Office is indexing your hard drive so that in the event you go searching for a document through an Office app, Office can use the database it created.

    It's a good thing to jettison, although it's not quite as trivial to disable as turning off features in Word's Tools>Options dialog box.

    I know how to do it in 95, but I don't know my way around NT, but basically, it's a control panel. Under '95, you open the Fast Find control panel, delete the Fast Find database file(s)corresponding to the drive(s) you'd like Windows to just leave the hell alone, confirm your choice(s), and close the control panel.
  • Gawd, what fun everybody could have re-engineering that bit o' code!
  • Actually, no, it's not. Steve Ballmer seems to be the only one with a small grip on reality. He is apparently garbbing the bull by the balls. There was an earlier article that described how he has been on a rampage inside M$ because of the shitty software and lame customer service they are known for, as well as a lot of internal complacency. he actually sees M$ as a threatened entity.
    Who knows if this will make any difference, as the DOJ is about 50 points ahead with 10 seconds to go....Can't wait to see that gavel come crashing down.....
  • Hehehe..... best laugh I had all day. Shit, maybe I will "Borg-ify his ass" this weekend....
  • >> But "everyone is using it, so it must be an industry standard" makes nothing but sense -- it's practically the definition of "industry standard".

    I think that's when it becomes a "de facto standard". Which is exactly what Office is.
  • The term "knowledge workers" has recently been used in the Economist, when advertising a report of the Economist Intelligence Unit and Anderson Consulting on the possibilities of opening new business in Asia. If I recall it correctly, a key issue is the creation of a pool of knowledge workers, meaning people that will create (instead of just use/abuse) knowledge, and the report analyzes how to recognize them, inspire them, and keep them. I guess many of us understand this concept, its fine implications, and even know the people. Sadly enough, I cannot afford ordering the report; I am sure they have read it in Microsoft though.
  • 6:1 And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.

    6:2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

    6:3 And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see.

    6:4 And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.

    6:5 And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand.

    6:6 And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.

    6:7 And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see.

    6:8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.

    "The Internet interprets censorship as damage,
  • Like you?

    You must be if you cannot see the humour in
    comparing four "Baby Bills" with the horsemen of
    the Apocalypse.


    I guess you cannot see it through all the piss.

    Nobody who understands free software gives two
    shits about Bill Gates or Microsoft.
    "The Internet interprets censorship as damage,

  • I hadn't heard about this. Don't see it anywhere in my copy of Excel97. How do I find it?

    (I don't use Excel for anything else, so I figure I might as well have some fun with it, right?)

  • Previous subject should have read: "Flight Simulator in Office?"

  • The whole megaserver thing sounds like Big Brother.

    Some day it will be illegal to have local storage > a certain small amount. After all, if you don't have anything to hide, why would you not want to put all your data on a distant server? ;)
  • And let us not forget Microsoft's stellar record
    on privacy, including recent revelations that private information was stored on Microsoft databases.

    Only speaking for myself, I don't think Microsoft
    is going to purge jack from their databases, despite promises to do so.

    The only Microsoft product I want is Age of Empires.

    I'm not even sure that Age of Empires is worth it.
  • Hmmm... let's see... 'geeks will never learn what business people want'...

    A clue for you, Buckwheat; the app that made micros acceptable to business people everywhere was VisiCalc... which was developed by a math and computer geek named Dan Bricklin (and he's still a genuine geek today).

    I guess that makes the score:

    Geeks 1 - Know Nothing Dork 0

  • I am thinking that although Office on Linux would draw quite the crowd, we don't need to fill Linux with bloated apps.
  • If it helps to promote the advance of computers, and software, then I say go for it. What ever happened to the true hacker ethic.

    I thought the "true hacker ethic" was "the best code will win."

    Do you honestly think MS Office qualifies as the best code? Best-promoted, probably; best-protected-from-competition-by-crushing-altern atives, highly likely...

    Jay (=
  • by Axe ( 11122 )
    Allright, I feel better now

    ... case of a rabid typist?

  • Group 1: Fear
    Group 2: Uncertainty
    Group 3: Doubt
    Group 4: Embrace and Extend
  • I can't remember where this came from, but I heard about a comparison of the fortunes of billg and John D. Rockefeller, and, after adjustments for inflation, Rockefeller could have hired Billy to be his caddy. Standard Oil owned what became:

    Amoco (the only one that still uses the Standard name much),
    Sohio (now part of BP),
    and Conoco. And Rockefeller got to be in on the ground floor of gasoline and heating oil. Billy got to help develop (let's give him his proper credit, after all) ROM BASIC.
  • For a while now there had been some predictions from myself and others as to what would MS do in the event of Linux either taking a significant portion of the MS Server market, or at least showing signs of such a potential.

    What would their options be? (Brief look back) We all know that MS cannot afford to lose its dominance in the server realm at all, hence their attempt at destruction of Netscape. Why was Netscape so threatening to them? Perhaps because they saw the potential of the browser being the determining factor of the server technology (among other desktop applications) that gets implemented in companies. Perhaps they wanted to implement the "de-commoditizing" of protocols as the Halloween Documents suggests, thereby locking out or at least shifting the Linux/UX momentum into a catch-up mode instead of leading mode (Which it has been and still is on
    the Server side), if only to to be used as FUD tactics.

    Having failed at this, what are their alternatives? How else can they claim this "un acquirable" software allowing them to once again
    control every aspect of the computer software technology?

    Well, perhaps there is a way... Microsoft can get into and establish control of not only the linux operating system but also the direction of Linux through its application and development tools. None of which, has to be GPL'ed. The other thing to consider from a suit stand point (only because they are the driving force of the funding, which means marketing, which means public opinion shaping of the mass purchasers) is : What are the competing products of both MS's Office Application and Development tools on the Linux platform? How
    many people are already familiar with them? Even... how many Linux people would love to have an "Office Equivalent" and VB/VC++ Type Development System for Linux? I suspect its too many to take the "Well I won't run it stance just because its MicroSoft" stance, A very dangerous stance to take considering companies ~will~ invest in "functions" before stance. And if companies begin to invest big dollars towards a specific application, that, will determine need, hence determining the product.

    Once Microsoft, manages to at least capture the Office market, and the development tools market on linux, a possible strategic move they could make is then issue an MS Linux, which of course would be geared towards being NT slave domain controllers and other nice things. Now comes the questions... Well Linux is GPL'ed.. and one could say "So What?".

    Possible scenario:
    a) MS Makes Application Level Office and DEvelopment Tools for Linux and capture a "significant" Application market share.
    b) MS Makes MS Linux and distributes all of wonderful Microsoft only source code (unnecessary source code, but necessary for MS products to work) to include kernel modifications and "specialized" libraries back in the linux community.
    c) RedHat, Caldera, SuSE, Debian and other Linux distributions (whom are already working with far less capital than MS) are now successfully behind. Now they not only have to keep improving the kernel, GNU distros (which microsoft will automatically have), but as well as the new Microsoft source, probably very undocumented (perhaps even a special edition undebugged GNU version) and convoluted Bloat ware that everyone (or at least their market share) now wants in Linux.
    d) Now the marketing/FUD starts, "Why buy RedHat or Download RedHat" or which ever to run MS Application for Linux, when you can simply download a "Supported" MS Version of Linux ? and if you give MS 250 - $500.00 for a Book/Supported Version of Linux, you will get all of the beautiful proprietary application binaries to run on it too already configured. Further More... " Its MicroSoft " ! ... which should not be taken lightly.
    e) Microsoft can now potentially direct, dictate and govern the direction, applications and even "GPL'ed version of de-commoditized" protocols that get embedded within Linux and their interaction with NT/Windows 2000.

    Am I paranoid? may be, but perhaps it would be safer to assume that MS is not just going to stand there and allow this Linux movement to sweep the server market from under their feet without a serious battle. Knowing this, it would be wise for everyone involved in linux to expect their intrusion, as they have always intruded in the past... through the "applications". They've done it to Novell (at one point owning more that 52% of the world's file server/network market). Look at them now. What does the Novell name mean now in
    comparison to NT? Did NT do this? Nope... the integration factor of Application to NT, marketing and MS branding did it.

    It's my opinion that before we get all comfy and feeling safe under the GPL protection as the savior of all evil, that we serious start addressing desktop applications as a serious hole that could potentially destroy "your" linux as you know it in the commercial arena.

    On this note, I would like to take this small opportunity (and I hope I totally wrong and surprised and beating Microsoft is as easy as
    everyone thinks it its) to name some of the biggest fools in the business.

    Top 8 List of fools

    1 - Borland / Inprise corporation.
    2 - IBM Corporation
    3 - Sun MicroSystems
    4 - SCO ( Probably the Biggest fools in all business senses)
    5 - Novell
    6 - The KDE/Qt - 40 column terminal flamers
    7 - The Non-Gui for text based EMACS for absolutely everything extremists.
    8 - The Gimme everything fo' free mongers.

    What makes these companies and select individuals fools.

    Borland, left with Microsoft reject crumbs of a market, a company (Bor), who just happens to be responsible for main stream application development to custom enterprise level applications sit there and has not, till this day ported a single visual development tool for Linux
    (and Interbase Ain't good enuff). An untouched market, MS no where to be found, the whole market to themselves... and they are going to wait for Microsoft to take it over. Smart move people.

    IBM, Where's the lotus suite? It should of been here 2 years ago. Installing Linux on IBM Systems is nice, but seeing they "have" the office suite to compete feature for feature and claim immediate market with, it seems a little odd that's there has not been and is no "solid" commitment on having this anytime soon. The idea is to have it "before" MS is there gobbling up the market and convice suits that the MS way is better rules once again, even on a different platform (which may change).

    Sun, GNU Solaris? That's nice and dandy, but how' bout applications and network tools for linux that works and introduces a seamless integration between your very powerful servers to be administered by linux desktops, or should we all buy a sparc with linux on it? Invest real money , put real effort please...

    SCO? Yeah, let me wait on skunkware to compile anything off the internet and don't you dare release a hint of source code to implement linux integration. Perhaps on day lxrun may "actually" run a linux program. Perhaps they should wait for someone to pay their $50,000.00 for their Xenix source code they so generously offer. May be I'll just buy a 5 user edition Unixware based Tarrentella Server for 4700.00 so I can run your SCO apps or my linux apps.

    Novell? where's client 32 or equivalent so I do a simple thing like may be add a user to a netware box? PS I don't want to ~have~ to run Caldera and their client blows, its install on RedHat is upseting at best and is anything but serious... sorry, All credit due to Caldera, but no one saw serious Novell development help in development. 4.01 NDS for Linux? no thanks let's get up to date here. Java based, Server Side X only administration on netware 5.0 servers? no thanks. Netware's IP connectivity? no thanks. How about
    NetAdmin, pconsole, filer.. how about those? (PS thanks for telnet rconsole, at least that's a start). Porting IE as an administration tools for netware just says it all... I'm sure Microsoft will reward them heavily by letting them keep a small portion of the print server market. Get off you asses (Netware) and provide ~real~ integration and linux based management tools for netware NOW! I'll consider Border Manager later how's that?

    The kde flamers / non-gui, At least get a glimpse at someone else's clue. No one is "removing" text based administration from linux, its always there, always will be, and don't install X. The difference between Linux and NT is "choice" and "Freedom", not X and Text Based.

    The gimme fo' free mongers. What about an Economy? A business plan ? Bills? College Fees? Paying for food? Legal fees? Accountants fees? I suggest reading a book somewhere. Yes! Open/Free software is good and creates numerous opportunities, yes! Its what allowed Linux to get where it is today is largely due to the fact that its "free" and "open", (as much so open in my mind but any ways..), However, for corporate and enterprise level based apps to compete with MS level apps "require" corporate funding and people and small developing businesses to dedicate near 100% of their time in development, which means they need money period.
    Even RedHat's business model is based on "income" for them to survive, not how many people download the RH distro and banner advertisement. Sorry folks, part time development, splintered development in distros and spare time hobbyists may make a good kernel and base tools but they aren't gonna beat MS applications. Once we come to this firm realization and deal with the facts, perhaps we stand a chance when MS decides to engage in war, dirty tactics, blood bath marketing methods, fear mongering and corporate bribing
    (which we have have only seen the tip of the iceberg towards linux).

    PS: the free version of star office or applix ware won't save thee and for some reason I doubt development will get any better on your promise to download it free to show them how much you care.

    The visionaries - some late, but better than never,

    Of course the Linux developers, kernel / apps / docs coders/writers

    RedHat,Caldera., SusE and others...
    The KDE Team
    The Gnome Team
    Computer Associates
    Freshmeat etc .. etc..
    Corel (out of complete lack of alternatives)

    And the late, but better late than never.

    And some others

    Finishing thoughts,

    For us to go around at this point, parading on how linux has and will destroy, or claim Micrsoft's market only shows complete ignorance, underestimation and flawed over optimistic theories about Microsoft. Linux needs, IBM, Sun, RedHat and other distros to put forth a "massive" effort towards the desktop apps hole which Microsoft will surely use to get in. This requires Money, Investment, the OSS and everyone else to work towards this goal "without splinter". And buy the damn cd from time to time! Especially if your not developing anything.

    This will insure the growth and continuation of Linux both on the server side and desktop side, free and commercial and choice.

    Allright, I feel better now

  • At least it's hard to spread virii in the emacs macro language. In fact, there are specific features in emacs to prevent this from happening because some smart person realized that's what it would be used for if the features weren't there.

  • Well, if I have to wander around the interface to figure out how to disable all of those annoying defaults then it's not very user friendly is it? It certainly doesn't seem like something that J. Random Casual User is going to like and enjoy if (s)he doesn't spend 1-2 hours a day typing up word documents.

  • speaking of things that MS Office has that I hate (when I'm force to use it that is!).

    - The paper-clip guy - I would like to smash his head in.

    - When I'm using variables in a document (ie i) and it makes them uppercase.

    - When it tries to format lists for me, but always does it wrong

    - When it stops responding for 4-5 minutes while it talks to NT 'bout something

    - When it tries to autocorrect my spelling as I type

    - In general, anytime it tries to think for me

  • asexual reproduction? Now that would be scary
  • hell, why don't we start "integrating" Office into the Linux kernel. Not only will this make Office run faster (thus screwing with the schedular and services), but when Office crashes it could also bring the whole system down. Then, we could enhance Office so that it acts more likes its own individual OS. To make Office feel like good old familar DOS/3.1x/95/98 we could make sure that macro viruses will run on Office for Linux. By doing this we can get McAfee to start porting its stuff to Linux. And as part of the Office port, they should also port the windows registry - I love the registry, its a great way to hide data that could have otherwise been stored in a easy to read text file (this ensures that all users use only your config tools - no matter how crapy they are). Finally, you could make Office open libc in read-write mode (even if it doesn't write to it) - by doing this you can be sure that only root can run Office. The joy of it all...

    Sorry, I'm done ranting now :-)

  • Office will never be on my computer you see,
    cuz it costs $600 and emacs is free.

    It's buggy and broken and slow
    And it's toolbars remind me of Windoze

    So what if WordPerfect has even more bloat
    And Applix is broken and StarOffice is choad

    Their not from Microsoft you see,
    And then my peecee is emmess free.

    Which makes me so morally superior to the guys in the dorm
    Who'd rather drink beer and chase girls than compile xforms.

    The respect that I've gotten from my honorable stand,
    hasn't got me laid yet but I'm sure that it can.

    Now if only the boss didn't use fast save,
    I'd format my FAT partition, even the games.

  • Office for Linux would indeed be "A Bad Thing." The more bloated and unstable apps _associated_ with Linux, the less credible it will appear as an OS. I know, the idea sounds silly, but if a mag like zd puts up a side-by-side comparison of Office for NT and Office for Linux and it shows that the Linux version is slower (even if intentionally made slower by MS) it will make it look like it's Linux's fault.
  • This is simply a reorganization. Instead of being organized around product lines, they are now going to be organized around four major market areas: Major businesses, consumers, programmers, and what they call "knowledge workers" (don't ask me, I just read it in the WSJ). This move will have absolutely no impact on the current DOJ trial. It's not splitting up into separate businesses. They aren't spinning off any companies. It's more like, say, you want to reorganize your refrigerator. Day old leftovers go on the top shelf, week old on the middle shelf, and growing on the bottom shelf. You don't take anything out, you just move it around a little.

    Companies do it all the time, and in this case, who really cares? The only thing this *might* do is make more games, etc, for the home user.
  • I fully agree.

    If MS deserves any of their "monopolies" it's in the office suite category. My company owns Corel WP Suite, Lotus Suite and Office. Office blows them all away. Sure it has it's bugs but show me a piece of software that doesn't. I don't want to see any reply's to this mentioning StarOffice either. It's not ready for primetime. I use it to write a letters to Granny but that's about it.

    I'm also sick of hearing the "bloatware" argument. Show me an office suite that isn't bloatware. Just because the Linux kernel is small doesn't mean we are seening the beginning of the end for bloatware. Distributed apps are about the only solution to that problem at this time. Until they become a reality apps will continue to get bigger. All these people who want to go back to booting Lotus from a 5-1/4" floppy need to get a life.

    MS is not going away. Now or ever. Gates is too smart and too good of a business man. MS apps for Linux can do nothing but good. It will convince people who once turned their backs on Linux to open their eyes and take a look. It could be what Linux needs to be pushed into the mainstream. You people may not agree with it but it's the truth. Users are the reason that 95% of us have jobs and collect those nice paychecks. Users buy MS software. They want it. They trust it. And guess what, most of them have never even heard of Linux. It may suck but it's a reality.

    For the programmers out there who only use Linux to hack out apps, don't worry. The kernel will always be there. The command prompts will always be there. No one is ever going to force you to buy, download or install a Microsoft program. Speaking for myself, I would love to exclusively run Linux on my machines to I welcome anyone and everyone who brings that closer to a reality for me. Stop trying to squash the growth of Linux, there are alot of us out there who want to use it for something other than programming.

  • ....isn't the fact that MS ported their apps to the Mac the reason that Apple still exists?
  • "And you send companies like Netscape and Corel the message that all that work they did, all that money they spent for _your_ cause meant nothing."

    Do you really think that these people port to Linux for our "cause". Wake up and smell it. These guys don't run their companies for causes. They run them to make money.

  • I'm getting tired of the mind numbingly pro-linux/anti-microsoft biased slant on (thanks to the filter system, however, I will be changing my view soon) I remember when I could pop on, and see "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." Now, the majority of the articles I see, are so heavily biased, that you might as well scream "if you don't Xclusively use Linux, you sux bilz azz!!" I hope to high heaven Star Wars Episode I -BOMBS!- Yes! I so much want to see that movie, but I'm sick and fsck'ing tired of all the hype. I hope that the trailer is the best bits! Wouldn't that really make all the hype look a bit silly? " announced today 'yeah, that stunk, we apologize for getting you all worked up on that celluloid disaster."

    Know how to get 200+ comments on a slashdot article? Post about Microsoft looking at Linux. "Microsoft can't rule the world. WEEEEE want too!!!" seems to be the general attitude of the "Borg Bill" comments these days. "Oh look, Linus was mentioned in the paper again today! Oh sorry, that's Linus from "Peanuts" Yes, he is a very respectable person, but geez, how many people know who's "heading" FreeBSD, or NetBSD, or any other Free OS effort? don't hear about them, do you?

    Yes, I -despise- Windows. I have to use it for work every day. It's frustrating as hell, watching Netscape, or Powerpoint crash while being productive. It's -sickening- that -ANY- program seems to be capable of taking out the kernel on a whim. Unacceptable that I should need to reboot because Word didn't like alt-tabbing to Excel so it crashed and killed the kernel. But how many people here have never touched a Microsoft product? Or been required to use it for work? What percentage of people here cut their teeth on Windows, or DOS. Yes, their business practices are Wrong. Yes I feel that their marketing department needs to be beaten senseless. I feel that they should not bother with deadlines, and forget about releasing a product until it's bug free. They want to make a deadline? then stop adding bloated features one user in a thousand will use. STOP taking a known standard, altering it, and try to pass it off as the same standard. Yes, it's easy to hate MSFT. even easier when "Borg Bill" can't respond. the internet.. great equalizer, everyone can bitch equally loud. No fear of retribution or accountability.

    Sure, MS Office on Linux would be nice. Good publicity for the OS, and validation from MSFT that linux is a valid market, and support from a big software name. Sure, it most likely won't be open source, sure it'll be bloated... So don't run it. nobody is holding your hand and forcing you to install it. Just like nobody forced you to install linux..

    I am -glad- Microsoft puts out horridly bloated software. I hope the trend in bad software continues. I hope Windows 2000 takes a full DVD to install and needs ten gig of HD space and a gig of ram. Because I -still- won't be using it. I could care less about what Msft puts out next, I'll still be running my free unix variants, free software, and getting my job done without uberfrequent crashes. Every line of bloat Msft puts out, pushes the hardware envelope cheaper and faster. Because thanks to Microsoft, (as a friend of mine commonly says) I can go out and buy a cheap-ass 486-120, install FreeBSD on it, and smoke the hell off people running P-200's.

    Next time you brag about your P-II 450, or your Celeron, or your SuperHighEndTodgerWaving system, just take a moment to ponder how fast your "high end" system would be, right now, if Windows -didn't- need all that horsepower to run with a semblance of useability. You think that there'd be 450mhz chips this soon, if there wasn't a big need for more power to overcome OS bloat?

    Thank you Rob for the filter system.. After today, at least in my eyes, slashdot will be less biased again. Maybe one day I'll see an OS article on something other than Windows or Linux.. heaven forbid there's more than -two- OS'es in the world. Some days, slashdot comments give militant OS advocates a bad name... I have an urge to scream "It's an operating system, a tool, not a religion." It's like "Keyboard" advocacy, "My keyboard allows me to flame at people faster than yours does!"

    Am I a troll? I don't wholly agree with your opinions, isn't it standard posting procedure on the internet to label me a troll? I've got an opinion on these things.. That what forums are for. At least I'm using my login to post my opinion, instead of hiding behind the anons, letting a faceless visage strengthen my resolve and backbone.. I believe in what I say. I have a pet peeve of people who expect me to believe their words, if they lack the conviction to stand behind them.. Yes. There are reasons for anonymity. I have nothing to hide here. I feel that it will always put more weight, seriousness, behind words that have a name behind them. How often does a "posted by anon" mean "Flamed without merit or justification"

    Yes... my spelling is not the best. My grammar sucks. I've survived the american public school system. I've got better things to do than go back over my post with a spelling checker, grammar checker, and six billion other proofreading tools. This is a rant, an opinion, not an English term paper.

    Shit... and here I told myself I'd stop long winded posting... Flame on.
  • >I still run an old P100 Mhz (non MMX),a 6 gig
    >hard drive with 48 megs of RAM. MAN does linux
    >fly on this baby! It does what I need and I never
    >have to reboot.

    >I wonder if FreeBSD would perform better?
    >Any diehard freebsd users out there to comment?

    From my experience with both, (I am running FreeBSD-Current on my systems, I haven't run Linux since the release of RedHat 5.1) There really won't be a hugely noticeable difference. Yes, some things will run differently, but that's true for any OS. Once you "tune" your system up under either one, there really shouldn't be too big a difference.

    I personally use FreeBSD over Linux, because A: I'm used to it. Less learning curve inertia to stay with FreeBSD. B: It runs every Linux app I need, C: I like the "One Software Repository" (aka ) instead of having to track down patches. D: I find it easier to install/configure a base level system. E: Less of a "We're using it because it's COOL! to use it instead of MS" mentality in many of the user circles I have participated in.

    However, unless you're running a server, you shouldn't see much of a big difference between FreeBSD and Linux. You will probably see many, many more drivers for Linux than FreeBSD (or at least more drivers sooner)

    However, for a rock-solid server OS, I'd have to say FreeBSD.. is a -single- P-200 running FreeBSD. When's the last time you've heard it being down? Yahoo? Hotmail? It's not a "turn key" server OS, and like any OS, it -does- need configuring and maintenance to achieve and maintain that stability. But year+ uptimes aren't uncommon.

    Personally.. Use what suits you best. Isn't that what "Free" OS'es are about in a way? doing something for -you- ? *smile*

    Hope this helps... or at least tries to..
  • This reorg has been in the news for weeks now.

    The reorg lines being drawn around customer groups will serve M$ in the DOJ trial - only! None of the resultant groups can survive on their own, they still share the same tech pool. But, being separate on paper, the DOJ can't bitch about monopolistic practices.

    M$ is admin heavy, and this is either a bad decision, or a legally driven one.

    If/when M$ redraws the reorg lines around Operating Systems, Developer Tools, Application Software, and Other (hardware, media, content); then we'll be looking at real news.

    As for LinuxOffice - do we really want to introduce closed source turnkey application suites into our open pasture??
  • After the "I think they're porting Office to Linux" article, I'm inclined to view any Microsoft speculation from ZD with a lot of skepticism.
  • Sure, port Office to Linux, draw more non-geek interest in the platform, and gradually drive other app suite companies out of the market.

    Then, blackmail Linux into whatever you want by threating to discontinue Office development. Once it becomes the "industry standard" on your platform, your platform is dead without it.

    Hey, it's happened before -- how else do you think they got Steve Jobs to say "Internet Explorer is my browser of choice"?
  • ....isn't the fact that MS ported their apps to the Mac the reason that Apple still exists?

    It's just you.
  • I tell you that most normal PEOPLE can't tell the difference between Office and Corel/Lotus whatever. They will never use most of the advanced features. How many people will benifit from using Office over the "Corel/Lotus/Applix/Star whatever" office suite. Responding with "me" means nothing, as most people don't even come to this site.
  • Its easy to come up with the arguments against word for normal people. Didn't you just spend a paragraph arguing one. The fact is, when most people get computers, they come with MS Works, which is good enough for most people. If Works is good enough, the office suites for Linux sure as hell are (the cost about the same too).

    About the emacs thing, I didn't know the the guy you replyed to mentioned emacs, at least in that message. ... wait, this whole post was a joke, wasn't stop here.
  • hmm. and i thought there were 12 regions of hell.


  • Yeah business is gonna use vi and emacs...
    get real. =)
  • I have used all those products..
    i hated Applix... StarOffice is pretty good IMO... i just hate that Win32 clone interface...

    WordPerfect8 is the shit if you ask me...
    the free edition needs goddam fonts though.
    mabye i should stop being a tight wallet and buy it? =)
    mabye when i get a job =)

    oh yeah my point
    why use MsOffice when there is WP8?
  • it may have not come to your attention that geeks are simply a super class of people (;

    i agree with some of the others who commented to this that i wont be going anywhere near the MS Office suit, on or off Linux.

    >it doesn't matter whether MS Office is bloated or
    >not, people need it anyway.

    hmm people need it? the bloat? people need to write in word processors equals true, people need to have things installed on the hard disk they will never use? false. bloatware is not needed, the "someone somewhere will need it so lets put it in" doenst work, with open source the people who need it can add it or get another too or jsut find someone who has if your not a "geek", why should i have the html extensions in a word processor when i dont want to use them? or have a pile of clipart i never use, or what about the other functions i not found yet? will i use them? no

    people do not need bloatware and people do not need microsoft.
  • >I mean come on, it's a Windows app. Point
    >and click. It's not like you're having to edit a
    >.mswordrc file.

    give me a .mswordrc anyday, at least then i only need to cp one file if i want to take my settings to another computer... not to mention the way MS Office (and more genrally windows) stores too many settings by computer instead of by user.

    ~ is where settings that affect how a user works belong.
  • MS can use almost any Linux lib wihtout having to GPL or open source the code they make, the LGPL has really taken away the best bits of the GPL that stoped copmanys like this doing what MS must plan to do... what i see coming is Linux core with a ton of MS extensions to run windows apps etc and things like office only working on the MS version of Linux... sad really.. we need more pure GPL
  • Nice post,
    I agree with you in most or your points.
    Not every linux user is antiM$ like it's a religion. And OS is just a tool.

    I think linux and free unix users are just fed up without having any choice. It's like the only choice is M$ and M$OS is just way too buggy, slow and bloated. Sure there's the MAC but it's too heavy GUI'd for my taste.

    It's not just M$ I hate but every body that supports it's platform.

    Maybe it's just me but I feel it's just part of some kind of conspiracy to come out with such bloated software just to force people to buy new chips.

    Think about it.

    Computer prices are always dropping if suddenly everyone came out with resource effiecient software, computer companies would go out of business!

    You can't push someone into buying a pricey Pentium III computer while a cheap P100 MHZ will do the job just as well.

    Anyways, I really liked this comment:
    "Because thanks to Microsoft, (as a friend of mine
    commonly says) I can go out and buy a cheap-ass 486-120, install FreeBSD on it, and smoke the hell off people running P-200's."

    I still run an old P100 Mhz (non MMX),a 6 gig hard drive with 48 megs of RAM. MAN does linux fly on this baby! It does what I need and I never have to reboot.

    I wonder if FreeBSD would perform better?
    Any diehard freebsd users out there to comment?

    All this is just my opinion.
  • So what.
    MS-DOS runs nice in dos-emu under Linux.
  • I see one big disadvantage, the same one we had with terminals attached to central mainframes: lose the server, lose everything. If your network connection is down, regardless of why, you can't even work locally. Not to mention the fun when the central staff "upgrades" the software to a version that breaks half your stuff with no warning whatsoever. What joy.

  • Hopefully any initiative along these lines will be constructed a bit more reliably than your 20-year-old mainframe.

    Microsoft's software, which they presumably are going to use as the basis for the central server, is about 2-3 orders of magnitude less reliable than that "20-year-old mainframe", based on uptime figures. And the central server is only one part of the reliability chain, a failure in a router or network hub will take down the system even if both the server and the client system are running perfectly. Maybe a distributed, redundant database system, but distributing the data wipes out the gains from centralizing it.

    I do the same at-work, at-home stuff you probably do. The difference is that I'm not dependent on the work system when at home. I need it to be reachable to pass data back and forth, but I still have all my apps, config data and such locally when the connection is down. For syncing things up, rdist and the occasional bit of diff and patch magic works nicely.

    And, as you pointed out, X11 and Unix already have complete remote access to the desktop, apps and config data on another system down pat. Rather than creating yet another standard, why doesn't NT simply adopt the network- and location-independent approach we're used to using X11?

  • Carnegie = steel
    Rockafeller = oil

    -J. Pierpont []
  • Does anyone think MS is just trying to brush off the DOJ? Or was this planned before the DOJ trobles? Seems like it might not be a stunt for the DOJ seeing their defiant attitude, but I'm not sure.
  • I just love the mentality, "everybody else uses it, so it must be good- even better- it must be an industry standard!"

  • Microsoft wouldn't necessarily operate these things. I don't see how this poses much more risk to privacy invasion by MS than storing your files on any MS OS machine does now.

    On the other hand, providing ubiquitos access to ones data from "any device" would require a much better understanding or encryption and security than MS has demonstraighted to this point.

Did you hear that two rabbits escaped from the zoo and so far they have only recaptured 116 of them?