After takin' a swig o' grog, Tim Smith belched out
this bit o' wisdom:
> Interesting that you didn't mention this part:
>
> The Bad ??? I still need Windows for a few programs. For instance,
> Linux's Microsoft alternative, Open Office, works for basic needs,
> but isn't truly backwards compatible with MS Office documents.
Nonetheless:
http://download.cnet.com/OpenOffice-org/3000-18483_4-10263109.html
OpenOffice.org 3.1.0
CNET editor's rating: 5 stars, editors' choice Apr 09
Average user rating: 4 stars
> If I???m working with an office document using any advanced features, I
> use MS Office to ensure anyone I send the document to can read it.
This I don't get. Just have them download OpenOffice. It's free, and,
unlike much of the half-malware people like to download, it is useful.
Now, lately, I've seen some real issues or regressions with oocalc:
1. Importing massive CSV files generated by Microsoft's "Performance"
tool. (This could have been my fault. I'm wondering if OO wasn't
handling commas in quoted material properly.)
2. I've had odd issues with Excel files, even ones generated by
OpenOffice (3.1), with data getting lost or scrambled between
worksheets. Very bad.
> Second, I've had some trouble viewing flash movies on the Internet
> (a problem which has been rightly joked about).
Odd. It works pretty well from what I've seen... even on 64-bit systems.
> Last, Linux has not passed the ultimate litmus test for
> user-friendliness: easy enough for my parents to use.
I suspect this guy is confusing "usage" with "configuration".
> He lists three problems with Linux that you and the other fake
> "advocates" repeatedly claim aren't real--people who say they have those
> problems must be trolls.
Depends where and how they're posting.
--
Q: How many IBM 370's does it take to execute a job?
A: Four, three to hold it down, and one to rip its head off.
|
|
