I’ll confess to not having compared them in the last 10 years or so, and I’d be happily surprised to be wrong, but I’m betting that “long way” is mostly in terms of features used by casual/home users, not power users who use the software on a professional basis to do professional work. .
You could have just said you don’t understand the difference between defending a socialist revolution and capitalist wars of Imperialism. The demonstration wasn’t necessary.
I hate that it is the way it is, but OSS “alternatives” are not serious tools for professionals. That said, I’m 100% in favor of nationalizing Adobe and Microsoft, since they’ve created a world where only their tools are good enough to do the job, but that’s not the conversation we’re having here.
Here’s a simple test: take all formatting out of a copy of Ulysses or some other doorstopper of a classic novel so it’s just a giant wall of text. Give two publishing pros each a copy of that wall of text, have one turn it in to a publishable book using the industry standard tools and one do the same task with the OSS “alternatives” and see who’s done first, and which version is the better looking final product.
Wanna place any bets?
Then that’s even worse, because the design of the OSS “alternatives” to everything I use daily for work screams “hobbyist who just needed the basic functions of a word processor and spreadsheet editor for school”.
Neither was worth the time it took to uninstall them when they proved almost unusably inferior to the industry standards.
These things are the standard for a reason, OSS hobbyists who are not graphic designers or admin workers generally will never be able to make something that is in the same league for the exact same reason that I couldn’t build a compiler better than the industry standard one, even if I technically had the coding skills to make it, because I haven’t spent decades using one professionally, so I wouldn’t know what an industry pro would want from it.
Yeah, pregnant 12 year olds aren’t really a problem for forced birthers. More like an opportunity. Besides she should have just kept her legs together, according to them
Bro OSS runs the fucking world
Yes, I’m well aware.
OSS office productivity tools still suck out loud, and the OSS nerds should stick to making widgets that make networking work better and keep their noses out of a domain they clearly don’t understand. Because open source office and graphic design software sucks out loud, and always has.
Get snooty with people who want to criticize OSS compilers, networking, and development tools all you want. But don’t try to push GIMP as an equivalent to Photoshop or the ridiculous Open Office suite as being in the same class as Microsoft. Don’t get me wrong - I wish to fuck there were a worthwhile alternative, but the industry standards are industry standards for a reason, and the people who make OSS don’t spend enough time working as an admin grunt to have the faintest clue why their “alternatives” aren’t worth the time it takes to install them and then uninstall them when it takes 20 minutes to create a document template.
Nah, you’re just delusional that your toy hammer is a good hammer.
The idea that everything that businesses do is as efficient as physically possible and the executives are all mega geniuses that are incapable of making bad decisions (or are even incentivized to make good decisions) is untrue.
I never said that was true. But I’ve sat through enough budget meetings to know for certain that if Open Office were even “good enough”, let alone “as good” it would be the corporate standard, because everyone hates paying for Office.
But it isn’t, for all the reasons I listed before.
They also differ in the sense that you have to completely relearn how to do everything you’ve been doing your whole career and usually in a way that is more complicated and less efficient.
It’s not missing components, it’s the fact that the most commonly used components are clunkier, less user friendly, and feel like an afterthought tacked on after someone made the software to prove they could.witbout ever talking to anyone who uses the software to do their job. If Open Office were as good a suite of office software as Microsoft, it’d be the industry standard. No business wants to pay Microsoft license fees just because, they do it because the tools work better and create a better end product.
Yeah,man. Can you believe those carpenters that still want to buy hammers from big tool? Our federation of unemployed navel gazers has built at least three hammer replacements that consist of a rock attached to a thick stick with Elmer’s glue, but they just wanna throw their money at the big tool companies. I even told them that our next iteration will have one side of the rock flattened for better hammering, but they keep going on about “ergonomics”, and “effectiveness”.
I swear, I think all the open source people see software as toys and only as toys. For those of us who actually use it to do things, it’s a tool, and it needs to work like the tools I’ve been using at work for more decades than I want to own up to.
Looks more to me like people arguing sexism isn’t the problem on this specific case, because it’s not. This is a class issue, not a gender issue. Men and women alike see consequences for CSA, as long as they aren’t wealthy or connected enough to have at least a couple Senators on speed dial.
Lol, dude defends the Democratic Party repeatedly and has the gall to call someone a “fascist murder apologist” for not accepting imperialist framing of AES states.
Pure clown shoes.
^ This user’s post sponsored by Radio Free Asia.
Thanks for the proof you can’t tell the difference between the bullshit trappings of Liberal Democracy and the actuality of a people’s democracy, have a nice day.
Nobody needs to infiltrate the left to get them not to vote for the center-right Democratic Party. The elected Democrats do that quite well with no help whatsoever.
All I’m getting here is that you don’t understand the actual meaning of a lot of the words you’re using, and that you uncritically accept Imperialist framing of everything.
China isn’t practicing “unfettered capitalism”, because their economy is under the control of the people through the Communist Party. What they are practicing is a form of socialism, the middle state between capitalism and communism which includes parts of both.
China did produce more billionaires than the US last year. Developing economies tend to do that faster and more often than stale ones. China also sentenced more billionaires to death for exploitation last year than the US has ever, but that little data point doesn’t fit with your CIA approved narrative.
“Supplying arms to war torn countries” is that Fedspeak for “giving oppressed nations and resistance groups the ability to fight back against Imperialism”?
China is not an “authoritarian Oligarchy”, you’re thinking of the United States.
The U.S. is an Oligarchy? The Research, Explained | RepresentUs https://share.google/JIlxY85GIDUfoKG6o
China is a robust democracy where people have direct control, so parties in the Western sense are unnecessary and undesirable.
Studies show strong public support for China’s political system https://share.google/T9Bm5GvSUW0Xt0hdz
authoritarian apologists.
Authoritarianism is a useless term created by Liberals to obfuscate the differences between Socialism and Fascism.
Russia is a vaguely protofascist Oligarchy, that’s kind of true. They only deserve support in so far as their actions weaken imperial hegemony.
China is not at all fascist and it’s laughable that you suggest it is. Unless your definition of Fascism is “when the government says there are things I’m not allowed to do”…
Love it when people prove they have gotten themselves into an argument way over their heads with someone who clearly knows a great deal more than them. They always start to act like actually addressing the points being made is beneath them. It’s the easiest to see who actually knows about a subject vs who is just good at regurgitating the tropes they read in billionaire-owned western media.
Then actually engage with the points they made and debunk them if they’re so ridiculous. All this is doing is making it obvious you don’t actually know enough about the subject to even have this argument.
I believe the correct answer to OPs question is "an object lesson in the difference between correlation and causality.
Or proof he doesn’t understand that difference, whichever applies.