what do u think about this argument?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| henke54 Nov 18, 2006 8:18 PM EDT |
what do u think about this argument? -->
Quoting:Novell recently announced a partnership with Microsoft. Novell introduces VBA support into Open Office. Aside from whether VBA should be a standard for our macros (I've used Open Office since the early days), it does sound like the sort of thing that Microsoft could use in a lawsuit. And I don't think anyone here thinks it would be too immoral for them.http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=302066 |
| rijelkentaurus Nov 18, 2006 10:38 PM EDT |
Sounds like Ubuntu folks are a little lax in their view of Free Software, or at least the ones referenced in that thread. They also sound like they're 13...or maybe that's just how they read to me. I've used Ubuntu but I have never felt the need to hang around on the forums unless I have a specific question I need answered. I think there's enough iffy on this deal that we should be wary of it. I'd like one of the big boys to step forward and call BS on MS, or officially offer to remove whatever code MS says Linux is infringing upon...how about Novell? They started this garbage, let them resolve it. |
| dcparris Nov 19, 2006 8:54 AM EDT |
I would appreciate it if you would change your 4-letter references. This is a family-friendly website. Thanks! |
| Abe Nov 19, 2006 10:52 AM EDT |
Such words are becoming the normal but still not appropriate to use on a widely popular site. Using couple letters with asterisks to complete the word instead I guess would be OK, right Don? In regards to VBA (VBS is more accurate) in OOo, a better solution would be to develop a translator instead to convert any VBS to any of the scripting languages that are supported in OOo. e.g. Python, Javascript, PEARL, etc... This will eliminate any patent or IP issues and will give users the easy migration to F/OSS for all of the thousands of Macros developed by companies over the years. |
| jsusanka Nov 19, 2006 11:29 AM EDT |
funny thing this summer I went to the road show for novell and they claimed that their openoffice that ships with suse run vb macros. someone raised their hands and asked if it run all the associated viruses too. he beat me to my question - but everyone laughed but I wanted an answer so I am assuming it does run all the viruses too. |
| Abe Nov 19, 2006 12:47 PM EDT |
Sure they will run the virus but most probably will error out since most virus are written for Windows. Even if they were OS agnostic, the damage wont be as bad unless you run OOo as root, do you? |
| rijelkentaurus Nov 19, 2006 3:08 PM EDT |
>I would appreciate it if you would change your 4-letter references. This is a family-friendly website. Sure. It's your site, boss. |
| dcparris Nov 20, 2006 7:03 AM EDT |
Thanks. :-) |
| henke54 Nov 20, 2006 4:47 PM EDT |
rijelkentaurus is european ? i presume .. ...and dcparris is obviously an american ... ;-P |
| rijelkentaurus Nov 20, 2006 4:59 PM EDT |
>rijelkentaurus is european ? ...and dcparris is obviously an american ...i presume .. ;-P Did I miss something? 8) |
| dcparris Nov 20, 2006 5:25 PM EDT |
> Using couple letters with asterisks to complete the word instead I guess would be OK, right Don? Well, my Grandpa (Opa) used to say that if you couldn't come up with better words, perhaps you should consult a dictionary. But yes, we do allow the asterisks/comic book representations of crude expletives. ;-) Crudeness aside, crude slang has typically been frowned upon as 'uneducated', although many rather well-educated people today frequently use such inarticulate forms. > Did I miss something? 8) Seems we both did. |
| henke54 Nov 21, 2006 1:11 AM EDT |
> Did I miss something? 8) >Seems we both did. well.. as an european, my perception is that in America xxxx- and f-words and so on , are rather more 'conservative' forbidden in the media than in Europe ( e.g. : http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0319-04.htm and the rather frequently tv-programma's with a (annoying)'tuut' instead of such a word )... on the other hand ... violence , guns and 'brain- and gut-splatter' on American TV-programs are commonly known... in Europe it's (usually)the other way around...make love, no war http://blog.wired.com/sex/2006/11/global_orgasm_a.html ;-) |
| rijelkentaurus Nov 21, 2006 2:58 AM EDT |
>well.. as an european, my perception is that in America xxxx- and f-words and so on , are rather more 'conservative' forbidden in the media than in Europe ( e.g. : [HYPERLINK@www.commondreams.org]
and the rather frequently tv-programma's with a (annoying)'tuut' instead of such a word )... on the other hand ... violence , guns and 'brain- and gut-splatter' on American TV-programs are commonly known... in Europe it's (usually)the other way around...make love, no war [HYPERLINK@blog.wired.com] Got it. No, I'm American, but I agree with your premise. >crude slang has typically been frowned upon as 'uneducated', although many rather well-educated people today frequently use such inarticulate forms. Words are words, and I find it horribly misguided that "Well, shoot!" is acceptable and "Well, s**t!" isn't. It's ridiculous, words are there for the expression of ideas, and the ideas are what matters. Have you never known a well-spoken bigot? And I find the ideas expressed by George Carlin in his standup routines to be quite insightful and incisive, and filled with the "7 words." However, this is not my house, and I accept that certain standards are expected, and I will honor that without grudge. |
| dinotrac Nov 21, 2006 3:04 AM EDT |
>Words are words If that were the case, words would be of no use, just a serious of curious grunts and moans with a bit more repetition than random noise. Words are useful because they act as expressions of something else. |
| rijelkentaurus Nov 21, 2006 6:51 AM EDT |
>If that were the case, words would be of no use, just a serious of curious grunts and moans with a bit more repetition than random noise. Words are useful because they act as expressions of something else. And all words can do that, not just the words someone deems "appropriate," which was really my point. In fact, words ARE just random noise, given structure by human understanding. In reality they have no meaning of themselves. I think the point is that I find "curse" words as useful and inoffensive as "normal" words, and you disagree with that point. There's no real problem, however. You can feel free to swear like a sailor in my house if you want; I'll talk "civilized" in yours. 8-) |
| dinotrac Nov 21, 2006 6:53 AM EDT |
>I think the point is that I find "curse" words as useful and inoffensive as "normal" As Michael Richards is finding out (and Mel Gibson before him), "offensive" has more to do with the listener than the speaker. |
| jdixon Nov 21, 2006 6:55 AM EDT |
> In reality they have no meaning of themselves. They have only the meaning we assign them. You are correct about that. However, unless there is general agreement as to that meaning, they become useless for conveying information, which is the ultimate goal. |
| rijelkentaurus Nov 21, 2006 10:45 AM EDT |
>As Michael Richards is finding out (and Mel Gibson before him), "offensive" has more to do with the listener than the speaker. I don't think it's fair to equate my use of "sh*t" with a drunken ninny badmouthing Jews, and anyone who is offended that much by it needs help. I don't think that's the case, at least I hope not. My point is simply that I don't find it offensive and I don't really understand why it is, but I'm willing to obey house rules. If you're looking to convince me that I'm wrong, well...good luck. And I mean that in a friendly way...I don't want to start a -censored- argument on the matter. ;-) |
| dinotrac Nov 21, 2006 11:06 AM EDT |
>I don't think it's fair to equate my use of "sh*t" with a drunken ninny badmouthing Jews, and anyone who is offended that much by it needs help. I wasn't equating it so much as using an extreme example to make the point. If everyone were precisely like you, you would never offend anybody -- at least not without trying. In a world of many cultures and many backgrounds, we will --- not may --- sometimes find ourselves in situations where the message being received has little to do with the message we are sending. That's the point of common courtesy...a little bit of societal grease that lets the parts rub up against each other without doing needless damage. |
| rijelkentaurus Nov 21, 2006 11:29 AM EDT |
>I wasn't equating it so much as using an extreme example to make the point. Cool. |
| tuxchick Nov 21, 2006 7:02 PM EDT |
dang, how did my sleeve get greasy. Ick. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!