I never touched 0365, but if your organization is already using nextcloud extensively, Collabora Online is trivial to setup and is available seamlessly from the files view, with collaborative editing built-in.

Because of the way it is designed (handling the file on a remote webdav with some permissions in the way) it might be possible to integrate with other solutions, but I never had to look into that either.

Browsers are, for most people, a white (or black) empty square that gets filled with whatever website is trendy. The least intrusive it is the better.

I'm not sure focusing on a redesign with flashy elements and bigger (and emptier) components, alongside with color-changing and other bells and whistle is improving the experience for anyone. It certainly won't help with less tech-literate users that are lost every time anything change. It won't help with power users, because they tend to have functionality over excessive design, and that sounds like it. It won't help with people that like "slick" design because, again, most of the time a web browser have very little element of its own UI on screen *by design*.

At best, the tab bar is there but if they decide to make it bigger and flashier and choke-full of extra features that nobody asked for, I'm fairly certain that adoption will not skyrocket this time either. The only people this would have a notable impact on are people that don't use their web browser as a web browser, I guess.

And in the meantime, there's two distinct "profile" features, bookmark management is abysmally bad, the side panel remain mostly unusable except for the handful of thing mozilla deemed worthy of it, performances are spotty on a beefy gaming PC, some long-standing compatibilities issues remain open I did not know that Mozilla was rolling in so much money that they could divert development resources to "shiny things nobody will see most of the time".

That would be a monumental waste of resource. We're using Collabora Online with nextcloud, it's well integrated and works well for quick edit, viewing, and some collaborative edits. Over the time it got serious performances and usability improvements. And all this without deviating much from the "original" idea of being LibreOffice (like) online.

At this point, why not either direct people to this existing, alive, useful project? Worst case scenario Collabora turns evil and decides to close it, in which case, fork *this* instead of the rotten husk of a broken idea that stayed in limbo so long it's evocation is used to scare children that refuses to sleep.

Especially since collabora seems quite competent with TDF projects, so it would make sense to ask *them* to work on it, if there's funding.

Unless I missed the memo saying that large open source projects suddenly got so much resources they have to burn them aimlessly, reusing existing, solid ground work sounds better than starting from scratch at every occasion.

The issue is that to maybe have some grand purpose, these "agents" require access to both data and a mean to action. And you can bet that for most people, if you have actual safeguards outside of the control of these "agents", say, a confirmation box with a sequence of actions, most people will blindly click "ok", while most other people will look for a way to disable the confirmation.

It's not a new problem either. The attack surface provided by the human interface was always a good one; keylogger, screen capture, scam/phishing targeted to the human, etc. The "only" change is that now, a rogue, semi-random agent will be allowed to behave erratically, while it's been proven time and time that these can be heavily influenced by inputs we're gladly giving them.

Basically, the human remain the weak point we're just looking to automate the scam part.

To be a bit more constructive, I agree that such things, should they prove to be valuable, should only run locally, with small, tailored models, with fully controlled input/output. Far for the dream of Iron Man's Jarvis, I know, but eh.

When your aunt click on the "sleep" button after an update and now the fans keeps spinning, and the device wakes up unexpectedly to do some "helpful" thing no user asked for, the appeal will quickly wane. On embedded/mobile/whatever device, power consumption is a must, and most of them are *designed* to be woke regularly in regular use. On a desktop/laptop, the "surprise, I wasn't sleeping" would require some adaptations. A laptop "waking up" in a backpack because you thought it was asleep would be bad, for example. And even today, I have a coworker that had to fiddle a LOT with his windows computer that just kept waking up in the middle of the night for no apparent reasons.

Basically, on a "full-fledged" computer, if I hit sleep, it should sleep. If I want it to be super available, I just leave it there, CPU will get to his lowest power state to do basically nothing, screens will turn off, fans, will ramp down (assuming it's not burning summer), and there will be no chance for confusion. This would consume more power, but probably not that much. When idle, a modern computer goes very low in that regard.

Is it a surprise that a tech that's mostly made to act as a yes man accept stupid requests?

If only this was posted on a news site, under some pretense of bringing information to the readers, right?

You're missing the point. Some people want to enjoy other's creations. Some people care about what's behind a piece. The question is not "can an LLM generate something decent", we already reached that point. The question is, why would I pay $80 for that. If you feel like it, sure, go for it. Some people don't.

Microsoft killed wordpad. It seems that a small text editor with basic formatting and some text-related features was NOT something people wanted.

Which makes the inclusion of basic formatting and some text-related features in notepad even more baffling.

The issue isn't that notepad is irreplaceable, it's more like how far up their collective asses can their heads go.

When microsoft execs wonder "why are people not happy with out products?", this is where we should point them toward. (I know they never ask themselves this question, unfortunately). As far as windows tools were concerned for the last forever, they had notepad: extremely barebone text editor, and wordpad.

Notepad go-to use was to "clean" the clipboard, or note something super quickly. Nothing more, nothing less. For every other usages there was a better tool. And conversely, there was no tool that ensured that a copy/paste would be clean better than notepad.

They also had wordpad. I never really knew what it was for, but it could do some amount of formatting/page layout, and could save usable enough files. It filled the niche of people that wanted "some" formatting beyond bare-bone notes, but did not want a full word processor supposedly.

Then came microsoft, killing wordpad out of the blue, and putting all of these features (and more, obviously) into notepad. Basically, they consider that the use case for wordpad is still present, since they keep the features up, but they renamed it "notepad". And in doing so, they removed the actually useful notepad, in favor of go fuck yourself.

It is impossible for most of us to understand how far removed people making these decisions are from the real world.

It's called "testing the water". Everytime, we progress a bit more toward that. You think draconian ID checking online came out of the blue? The idea's been marinating for years. Full control over user devices is a dream for these business. They're in a position to enforce that on mobile, and will keep trying, normalizing the idea. They also looked into doing the same for web browsers, backed out, but still, push the standards towards including more and more component to serve that purpose.

Minimizing this because they walked back one step after walking forward two steps is silly.

The point is that, on your own device, if you want to do something, you can do it.

They say "advanced users" in the sense that your uncle that's technologically inept would have to jump through hoops and ignore many warning labels that would usually drive them toward being cautious (or calling their all-knowing nephew) in an attempt to thwart unwanted apk installation.

Yes, that mean that nowadays, "advanced users" means "know how to read".

Anyway, it does not have anything to do with the quality, safety, or whatever, of the apk. There's no expectation on the end user to be aware of everything. The premise is that, my device, my choice, and if I, as an adult, want to install whatever, it's my decision, not google's.

This is, basically, going to appease a lot of people. Give me control over my damn device.

It seems obvious that this was a way to test the water for more drastic measures in the future, though. It always is.

Some years ago, I was willing to *pay* to use MS software. And did, in fact. Despite them. Despite Microsoft trying its best, at every corner, to be the most obnoxious, annoying, backward clowns of software development. I paid, and kept using windows and a handful of things. But they kept pulling away, again, again, and again.

Now they'd have to pay me real money for even thinking about it. And a lot of it.

Had they just tried to make useful, non intrusive OS, with stable, non borked software around it, combined with their leader position, they could have kept going and going. But no, they had to shit the bed, repeatedly, with a lot of effort.