On 07/10/2011 03:29 PM, Stephen wrote:
> On 07/10/2011 11:44 AM, Invisible wrote:
>> Seriously. Name /one thing/ that Word 2010 has that Word 2 for
>> Workgroups didn't have.
>
> They have added the ability to embed another document inside word
> instead of just linking to it. Very handy if you want to create a
> document locally and upload it to a secure server.

I'm fairly sure Office v2 had that. I may be wrong. Certainly Office 97 
definitely had that. And that was, what, 14 years ago?

>> How about Excel 2010? Well, Excel 2 had charts. They looked horrid, but
>> they were there. Each new release of Excel adds a few more chart types.
>
> Talking about charts, the ability to get trend lines from your data and
> display the equation, is useful. Before you had to use Power Point for
> that.

Excel 97 had trend lines. Again, 14 years ago.

> I've not used Access for yonks and Power Point makes me fall asl...
> zzzzz ;-)

I think that's an issue with the kind of people who use PowerPoint, 
rather than an issue with the software itself. ;-)

>> And then there's Outlook.
>
> If you have ever used Lotus Notes you would not be complaining. ;-)

Outlook is quite nice. Exchange is a hellish nightmare. (Or at least, 
the version I used was. That was a while ago now...)

In fairness, I'm not aware of anything else that does what Outlook and 
Exchange do.

Post a reply to this message

>> Most of my /life/ is unimportant. :-(
>
> Dinkums!
>
> It is what you make it.

And apparently most of what I make it is surfing the net to pass the 
time. (Mainly because it's intractably difficult to actually /achieve/ 
anything...)

>>>> Apparently I'm stupid.
>>>
>>> Yes you are. Now are you happy? :-P
>>
>> No, just disappointed.
>
> What that I agreed with you?

No. I'm unhappy that I'm stupid. (And fat, and unfit, and unattractive, 
and...)

> See you are not stupid you can tell when a politician is lying.
>
> A. Their lips are moving. ;-)

No, no. See, even their non-verbal communication is a lie!

See that guy smiling? It isn't because our country has a bright future 
now...

Post a reply to this message

On 07/10/2011 3:36 PM, Invisible wrote:
> I'm fairly sure Office v2 had that. I may be wrong. Certainly Office 97
> definitely had that. And that was, what, 14 years ago?
>

May be but it works now. The number of projects I've been on and when 
you try to read the embedded docs from a server and can't, are legion.


>
> Excel 97 had trend lines. Again, 14 years ago.
>

But would it tell you what the equation was? Of course I could be in my 
dotage and it was that long ago.


>
> I think that's an issue with the kind of people who use PowerPoint,
> rather than an issue with the software itself. ;-)
>

Okay, I'll give you that.

>>> And then there's Outlook.
>>
>> If you have ever used Lotus Notes you would not be complaining. ;-)
>
> Outlook is quite nice. Exchange is a hellish nightmare. (Or at least,
> the version I used was. That was a while ago now...)
>

It's not got any better IME.

> In fairness, I'm not aware of anything else that does what Outlook and
> Exchange do.

For big companies, you are probably right.
-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 07/10/2011 3:38 PM, Invisible wrote:
>
> No. I'm unhappy that I'm stupid. (And fat, and unfit, and unattractive,
> and...)

O_O

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

> In fairness, I'm not aware of anything else that does what Outlook and
> Exchange do.


Sledgehammer?  ... C6?   ... Sidewinder missle?

Post a reply to this message

On 10/7/2011 7:36 AM, Invisible wrote:
> Outlook is quite nice. Exchange is a hellish nightmare. (Or at least,
> the version I used was. That was a while ago now...)
>
> In fairness, I'm not aware of anything else that does what Outlook and
> Exchange do.
What, install viruses? Sorry, haven't used it myself for some time, so I 
have no clue what "special feature" these are supposed to have. lol

Post a reply to this message

On 10/7/2011 1:47 AM, Invisible wrote:
>> But then it (unreasonably) pisses me off watching some other people use
>> their computers. Their slow deliberate use of the mouse and context menu
>> makes me want to shove them aside and drive myself. Lord! I'm getting to
>> be a crusty old man. :-)
>
> No, that was already annoying me 20 years ago...
Sigh.. You people are the cause of things like Blender being a damn 
nightmare of hotkeys you have to memorize to do shit, even in the new 
version, instead of a damn toolbar, and controls that are in places that 
make some slight sense. Though.. I suppose it is marginally better than 
K-3D, which seems to use the toolbar to insert animation elements, while 
using a right click menu for the "actual" build functions (with 
identical names)... I mean, how the frak are you supposed to scroll 
through 900 damn menu items to find something, often with some bizarre 
name, instead of using the toolbar to just pick the "bend this" 
function? I seriously wonder some times about the sanity of the people 
that write some of these applications.

Still. For someone that doesn't have enough money to shell out $4,000 in 
software, to get the applications that are the top line out there, I ask 
just one question, "Why they hell isn't there anything that comes even 
'vaguely' close to Rhinoceros?" At least Photoshop has both Gimp, and 
the cheaper, but still not free, but close enough, Paintshop Pro. But, 
you want Nurbs... Good luck finding one that fully supports it, and 
isn't an, "all in one, so we do everything incompletely, and in the most 
confusing way possible", application.

And, somehow, using Wings, just isn't going to be real fun. The only up 
side is, I am looking for one to export to a non-nurbs mesh, and/or 
directly to Collada (or how ever its spelled), because Linden Labs 
"finally" got off their asses and supported mesh imports, instead of the 
nightmare displacement map idiocy they called "sculpties", and everyone 
else called "prim torture". lol

Post a reply to this message

>> In fairness, I'm not aware of anything else that does what Outlook and
>> Exchange do.

> What, install viruses?

I've heard Word used to do that a lot. I've never seen it actually 
happen with Outlook though.

> Sorry, haven't used it myself for some time, so I
> have no clue what "special feature" these are supposed to have. lol

I've seen plenty of software that gives you a calendar, to-do list, and 
so on. I've seen software that lets you send email via SMTP, and receive 
it via IMAP or POP3. I've seen server software to go on the other end.

But the combination of Outlook and Exchange does far more than that. 
Exchange stores email (and more) in a central database, with online 
backup and restore features, quotas and so forth. Outlook lets you read 
your email directly off the server. You don't have to "download" it as 
you do with normal email protocols. The server database and the client 
database are kept automatically synchronised, without you having to 
manually micro-manage it. You can send an email to somebody else without 
it ever leaving the server. You can get a list of all the servers on the 
server, and you can email somebody just by typing their real name. You 
can request notifications, so you know when somebody has read the email 
you sent them. You can create shared folders, which receive external 
email and multiple people can access it, see which messages have been 
read, etc. You can do shared calendars. You can design a form, email it 
to a bunch of people, and the server will collate the results. You can 
do email processing rules ON THE SERVER, rather than at your particular 
client.

I haven't seen anything else that can do half this stuff.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 09:37:46 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 06/10/2011 11:52 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> I rather have a shopping list.:)
>>
>> And for something like a running total, round numbers are "good
>> enough".
>>
>>
> I do and it is. But knowing what to round and in what direction requires
> a little effort.

Certainly. :)

>> But one of the trends in learning in general is that people tend to not
>> try to remember facts because they can be looked up so easily.  This is
>> analogous to people not being able to do basic arithmetic because of
>> the ubiquity of technology that makes it unnecessary.
>>
>>
> And is that a good trend? If you don't exercise your memory then you run
> the risk of not being able to use it when you need it. It is all very
> well being able to look things up but if you can't remember what it is
> that you want to know.

Well, I didn't say it was a good trend, but it is the way it is.  People 
tend to want 'just in time' information these days, rather than having to 
remember pesky facts.

> Another case is in social interaction. It gives a poor impression if you
> can't remember who the current prime minister or president is but say
> just a minute while I Google that.

Sure, amongst our age classes.  Amongst younger age groups, though, value 
knowing how to find out stuff rather than having to remember it all.  
Good or bad, it is what it is.

>> I'm not saying it's a particularly good thing, but it's the way people
>> tend to behave.
> 
> They also like to sit on a couch and eat potatoes. ;-)

True.  Speaking of which, I need to get some lunch. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 09:25:56 +0100, Invisible wrote:

>>> In Windoze:
>>>
>>> Start>  type calc [enter]
> 
> Actually, I put that on the Quick Launch bar so I can always access it
> quickly.
> 
>> In Linux:
>>
>> In the already running terminal window (on my system, I always have one
>> running), "bc".
> 
> 1. How do you get it so a terminal is always available? (Most distros
> I've seen make the terminal program one of the hardest things to find.

Alt-F2 -> gnome-terminal.

Done.

> It's easy to find Firefox or Evolution or Jabba, but the terminal window
> is usually somewhere under "advanced"... It's almost as if I'm using a
> Microsoft OS!)

It's usually under "system tools", which is appropriate.

> 2. Why type "bc" when you can type "ghci"? ;-)

Because 'bc' actually does something on my system - namely, it starts an 
arbitrary precision calculator. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message