They fund terrorism in the countries around them, all the neighboring countries there hates Iran. That is why they aren't really angry that USA is bombing Iran.
I think they are kind of angry? At least they don't seem interested in participating despite being targeted by Iran themselves, I don't know how more they could express their disagreement with this operation than even accepting to be bombed without any reaction?
LibreOffice is like Office a collection of intercompatible apps. Microsoft Works was a single application offering Word/Excel/Outlook-like functionality.
1980s office suites very commonly included terminal emulators, because they were in high-demand back then
Most large enterprises, you’d have core business applications running on a mainframe or minicomputer or Unix host, and you’d need a terminal emulator to access them from your PC/microcomputer. A lot of places used mainframe/minicomputer-based email/calendar (e.g. IBM PROFS, DISOSS, SNADS, Office/36, OfficeVision; DEC ALL-IN-ONE; DataGeneral CEO; HPMAIL; etc) and centrally hosted word processing systems (e.g. IBM DisplayWriter) were commonly used for document/content management. And then added to that you had services like CompuServe and BBS systems
It is likely the Microsoft Works developers dogfooded its terminal emulator a lot, since at the time Microsoft ran its business on Xenix servers, until they eventually migrated to Windows NT in the first half of the 1990s
In fact, MS-DOS was initially developed on mainframe/micros and targeted the IBM PC via cross compilation and link cable, they weren't doing it directly.
The user is the end-user of the product. If the relicensing means that someone down the line receives a close-down binary application that he cannot modify, that's a violation of the user's rights.
But it's a non-issue as said user can just have AI reverse engineer said binary. Or reimplement something with the same specs. That's what it means for code to be cheap.
It may be "cheap" at the moment. Let's revisit when the AI companies decide they need to regain a little bit of the hundreds of billions of dollars in losses they're creating.
China is always waiting for this. And the US won't allow China to get all the users who'd emigrate over increased costs, so the costs will remain low. They'll have to find ways to recoup that don't involve raising the cost of code.
That is still true, but it was more relevant back when "user" meant "programmer at another university". The "end-user" for most software is not a programmer these days.
The toolbar has a "Customize toolbar" GUI screen that lets you add, remove and reorder elements. Maybe something similar could be done for context menus, including new entries added by extensions.
Because it comes 'free' with an Office365 subscription. Embrace (<<you are here), extend, extinguish.
It's usually 'management'. The same management that won't pay for developer tools (including Slack) because 'why do you need that when you can do 95% of your work in VSCode?' It's also usually the same sort of management that can do 95% of their documents in... VSCode and markdown. Or LibreOffice.
Having been in the position, on a corporate Active Directory network it very much easier to roll out Teams than anything else. It works fine at the kind of internal video calls that companies spend their days on.
Yeah or 80% even so they can sound cool and quote the pateto principle. Which isn't meant as an excuse to not bother to do the 20% at all but they use it as such.
I don't think M$ does much dogfooding. The kinds of issues I encounter being forced to use their pan-awfuly for work makes me very skeptical of this idea.
… when it works. And if you never have to change camera or microphone settings.
> and calendar integration.
The little notification that pops up telling you your meeting is about to start based on your calendar? The one you better not click in the first 5 or so seconds it's there, because then you'll end up with an error message that tells you absolutely nothing, have to go back to the chat, and try again?
reply