Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 63

Thread: Microsoft Looking At Office For Linux In 2014

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    They are not wild claims, they are common knowledge for everyone who's used Office for Mac.

    It has incompatibilities with Windows office using the exact same doc format both are supposed to fully support - how do you explain that if the common code, ie format support, is shared?

    Updates for it take much longer, sometimes years longer, than those for w32 office.


    Have some links in addition:
    http://antonym.org/2006/08/ms-office...l-updated.html
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microso...Mac_since_1995
    None of this supports your claim office for Mac was written from scratch. There are incompatibilies between different versions on windows this does not mean they do not share code bases. Also just because VB is not supported in mac also does not mean the do not share code bases.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    One of the reasons of poor linux adoption was that it didn't support office. Now maybe, hopefully, it will. If you consider this to be bad just because it won't be open source then you are a zealot. No generalization. Just defining the term. Thus I defined a way to spot a zealot. He's against office on linux. Office on linux will be good for both microsoft and linux. But I do fear Richard Stallman jumping on this and his army of idiots following him to do whatever is necessary to thwart Microsoft's plans.
    "Thus I defined a way to spot a zealot" you mean to make a generalisation.

    If you have not noticed. No one is calling for open source office you are just trolling once again. I tend to think office for linux will be a good thing for the platform but that doesnt mean everyone one that doesnt is an open source zealot as you would like to say. The main issue with office is not that its not open source, but that it doesnt support open standards. This forces you to use office to access your own documents which should be your property and should not have such restrictions. If office were to stop being made in ten or twenty years time there may be no way for you to access your documents.

    Finally since you love the term zealot so much I would like to inform you that you yourself are a zealot. Thats right on your self proclaimed war on open source fans you seem to be a fully blown closed source zealot, which brings anyone to the logical question of why you are a member of these forums? Why you follow the Phoronix blog? And why you even use linux? I still think that you are just a microsoft fanboy who doesnt acctually use linux and just trolls these forums.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Over there somewhere
    Posts
    237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by necro-lover View Post
    I think you can't even spell the word "Philosopher" hey do a reality check RMS do have a wikipedia page you don't have a wikipedia page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman

    Your babbling is just SPAM without any relevance.

    I'm sure RMS beat you in any tropic in a nano-second.

    but go one write bullshit no one will ever try to stop you.
    OMFG! Did you really just rip on someone and call their ability to spell into question? And then commit the Appeal to Authority fallacy in the same sentence where you made fun of someone's philosophical bonifides?

    Fucking comic gold!

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Over there somewhere
    Posts
    237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erendorn View Post
    Irrelevant to the subject, but you wrote:
    (if "consider this to be bad" then "zealot") Thus ("zealot" is "against office on linux")
    , or, in simpler for
    (A => B) => (A = B)
    , which is awfully wrong.
    Not quite correct.

    If A, then B. But A != B. A is a sufficient condition for B, but they are not equivalent. If A = B, as you suggest, then B would be a sufficient condition for A as well, but this would be affirming the consequent - a fallacy.

    If A, then B.
    B.
    Therefore, A.

    That's a no-no, but it's an honest mistake. Either way, it's not what he was actually saying. He was just defining the term with an example.

    Cheers!

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    What I do notice in the linux world and it pisses me off is this attitude that everything that is not open source is somehow evil.
    Lol, there is no end to the entertainment you provide. Is this really so surprising that it actually pisses you off? The linux world is where the core operating system, application frameworks, and majority of applications are open source and where the developers and majority of users all subscribe to open computing philosophy's. Yet while reading the forum of a website that is dedicated to following open source operating systems, you are actually getting pissed of that people want more projects to become open source?
    What makes me almost fall off my chair in hysterics is that you continually claim to be pragmatic yet you seem unable to make any of these observations on your own. If you were truly pragmatic you would just accept this is the way the majority of people think in the linux world and move on.

    But no fact is you are just a troll here to get in the way of passionate people who are trying to have informative discussions about their operating system of choice. How about just trying to make a constructive comment in these forums, come on just once?
    Last edited by timothyja; 02-06-2013 at 10:06 PM.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by locovaca View Post
    There's never been an IE for Linux. There was, however, IE for Unix.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_for_UNIX
    Thank you, I remember something vaguely like that, at least your url clears it up

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timothyja View Post
    None of this supports your claim office for Mac was written from scratch. There are incompatibilies between different versions on windows this does not mean they do not share code bases. Also just because VB is not supported in mac also does not mean the do not share code bases.
    OK; let's say instead that whatever sharing exists is poor and mostly ancient. Better?

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,733

    Default

    In addition, the incompatibilities were within the same product family, not between families like in your Windows comparison. Ie, Office for Windows 97 and Office for Mac 98, or the next revision, Office XP on Windows vs Office 2001 on Mac.

    (editing still broken in Opera)

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    Microsoft's real moneymaker has always been office. If they see linux become viable for the desktop then I could see them doing this, to make sure they lock as many people as possible into their office ecosystem.
    At our company, Office isn't a large proportion of the cost - All the CALs for all the services are what cost the money on a Microsoft network.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by petlab View Post
    This has got to be an April fools. Just thinking about it causes a headache.
    And its not even April 1st yet dammit

    MS seems to always be shooting its mouth off about Linux and all we say now is "ho hum". Right now LibreOffice is getting better and better at being able to handle Office documents without mangling them so that they still can be opened in MS Office without any issues.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •