Les Mikesell wrote:
On 1/19/2011 10:43 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
The difference is that open source server software has been 'feature complete' for ages and the standards processes that change client/server interactions are very, very slow - so outdated versions
of server
software is not a problem as long as bug/security fixes are made. That's not true for desktop applications and environments. If you don't have something current you are missing the improvements that many thousands of man-hours of work have made. Personally, I use Windows at
<snip> I'll disagree here: I've seen hardly any "improvements" in any of the (admittedly not a lot) of software I run. As a definition of this, let me note that in '95, PC Mag ran a review of word processors, and noted
that
90% of the users (then) used only 10% of the features, and the other 10% of users who *did* use those features only used them about 10% of the time.
You are biased by having learned to live with the restrictions of old
So, what I like how something works is all "old cruft", and I should get with the program, and not have opinions on what I want and how I want it to work? That *is* what you're saying to me, to which I respond with "take your opinion and shove it".
cruft. At the very least you have to be able to exchange data files and view all common media files on a desktop. What do you do when someone gives you a docx or xlsx file?
openoffice opens both. And I have no idea what "features" M$ added, or whether, as usual, it was just a change to the file format solely and exclusively to force people to buy the latest versions of their crap.
And upgrades to open them I'd file under "bugfix", after M# introduced bugs.
The last "oh, I like this" feature I can remember was when firefox introduced tabs. On the other hand, a *lot* of "improvements" I find more and more objectionable, such as thunderbird trying *very* hard to
look
and act more and more like Lookout, er, Outlook, and I *LOATHE* the latest versions of Outlook.
Sorry, but Outlook 2003 and 2007 are huge improvements over earlier versions - and lacking tight integration between messaging and calendar/scheduling has been one of the places where free software really missed the boat.
No, they are *NOT* "huge improvements", they are absolute *shit*, that make any of the minor things I occasionally want/need to do *far* harder. And I thought I hated 2003, but 2007 I despise with a passion.
And remember that firefox/openoffice are rare exceptions in RHEL/Centos in that they have had major-version updates since the distro release, even though they still are far behind 'current' now. The rest of the distro is much older and doesn't do much of what people do with desktops today (subscribing to podcasts, media playing, serving media to other devices, etc.).
Huh? I have no problem with streaming media, or playing pretty much any media that I care to. What media is difficult to serve?
Sorry, but in *my* opinion, you've swallowed the Kool-Aid to the dregs.
mark