 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16/07/2011 06:55 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:06:20 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>
>> utterly
>> plastered with ads,
>
> Hmmm, I don't see those on Facebook or Google+....Oh, wait, because I use
> one of those intractably-difficult-to-implement ad blockers that couldn't
> possibly solve the impossible problem of blocking ads. ;)
>
> <scnr>
Now try reading what I actually wrote: I said that the *other* social
sites are ad-encrusted. :-P
Although, Facebook does have ads. But it's trivially easy to ignore
them, because they're in a segregated area that you can just ignore.
A while back I saw a big documentary on TV making this big deal about
how Facebook will shortly be "using your personal data to target adverts
at you". My reaction at the time was "...and?" Today, now that I
actually /have/ a Facebook account, I can see that the nature of this
"targetting" is pittiful. Like, I write a message such as "Well, the
band was really weak last night", and the adverts scream "WANT TO BUILD
MORE MUSCLE?"
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 11:26:12 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> On 16/07/2011 08:52 AM, Warp wrote:
>
>> Competition is not pointless. It entices betterment and progress.
>
> Sure. But given the choice between (say) a document editor that can
> handle bold and italic text, verses Microsoft Word 2010... it's not much
> of a competition, is it?
Depends on what you need. If you just need to do bold and italic text,
why spend the money on Word 2010 or the full office suite? If the need
is just those two things, getting Office 2010 is like using a nuke to
kill a midge.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 11:45:48 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> On 16/07/2011 06:55 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:06:20 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>
>>> utterly
>>> plastered with ads,
>>
>> Hmmm, I don't see those on Facebook or Google+....Oh, wait, because I
>> use one of those intractably-difficult-to-implement ad blockers that
>> couldn't possibly solve the impossible problem of blocking ads. ;)
>>
>> <scnr>
>
> Now try reading what I actually wrote: I said that the *other* social
> sites are ad-encrusted. :-P
Actually, that's not what you said. You said:
"At the behest of various people I know, at one time or another I've been
signed up to various "social" websites. Which was a rather baffling
experience, in that they were all horrifyingly broken (if you thought MS
Word was unreliable, it's rock-solid compared to this crap!), utterly
plastered with ads, and more to the point they DON'T ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING.
Really strange."
'various social websites' = not excluding Facebook. :P
> Although, Facebook does have ads. But it's trivially easy to ignore
> them, because they're in a segregated area that you can just ignore.
It's even easier to ignore them with FB Purity and an ad blocker
installed - and an ad blocker will help with all the other sites as well,
as we talked about earlier.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 17-7-2011 21:24, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 11:26:12 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
>> On 16/07/2011 08:52 AM, Warp wrote:
>>
>>> Competition is not pointless. It entices betterment and progress.
>>
>> Sure. But given the choice between (say) a document editor that can
>> handle bold and italic text, verses Microsoft Word 2010... it's not much
>> of a competition, is it?
>
> Depends on what you need. If you just need to do bold and italic text,
> why spend the money on Word 2010 or the full office suite? If the need
> is just those two things, getting Office 2010 is like using a nuke to
> kill a midge.
1) I prefer LaTeX, so bold and italic are an unnecessary luxury.
2) Word until now was unable to save a document and layout in a
internationally recognized standard format. I haven't seen Word 2010,
but if it still isn't able to save in e.g. .odt I prefer not to use it.
--
Apparently you can afford your own dictator for less than 10 cents per
citizen per day.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16/07/2011 6:55 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Thought you should've gotten one from me - the system seems to indicate
> that invitations are sent out to people you add to circles who are not in
> the system.
>
> Odd that it didn't.
That’s probably because I’ve had a gmail account since 2008 and have
never used it. So I forgot.
I’ve also had a Hotmail account since last century which I check
whenever I start Firefox but never send mail from.
You wouldn’t think I earned my living in IT. Would you? :-D
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Although, Facebook does have ads. But it's trivially easy to ignore
>> them, because they're in a segregated area that you can just ignore.
>
> It's even easier to ignore them with FB Purity and an ad blocker
> installed - and an ad blocker will help with all the other sites as well,
> as we talked about earlier.
Even with various software installed to block ads, the fact that certain
sites are plastered with ads is still not a good thing.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 09:02:02 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>> Although, Facebook does have ads. But it's trivially easy to ignore
>>> them, because they're in a segregated area that you can just ignore.
>>
>> It's even easier to ignore them with FB Purity and an ad blocker
>> installed - and an ad blocker will help with all the other sites as
>> well, as we talked about earlier.
>
> Even with various software installed to block ads, the fact that certain
> sites are plastered with ads is still not a good thing.
It doesn't bother me, because I don't see them, which is the ultimate
point when it comes to a user's personal experience with the 'net.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 04:26:41 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 16/07/2011 6:55 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Thought you should've gotten one from me - the system seems to indicate
>> that invitations are sent out to people you add to circles who are not
>> in the system.
>>
>> Odd that it didn't.
>
> That’s probably because I’ve had a gmail account since 2008 and have
> never used it. So I forgot.
But I don't have that address, I just have your AOL address.
> I’ve also had a Hotmail account since last century which I check
> whenever I start Firefox but never send mail from. You wouldn’t think I
> earned my living in IT. Would you? :-D
LOL
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18/07/2011 8:57 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> That’s probably because I’ve had a gmail account since 2008 and have
>> > never used it. So I forgot.
> But I don't have that address, I just have your AOL address.
>
Curiouser and curiouser!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in news:4E2### [at] gmail com andrel wrote:
> I haven't seen Word 2010,
> but if it still isn't able to save in e.g. .odt I prefer not to use it.
>
it does do .odf
ingo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
