 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2010"Upgrade"
Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your closets, in your drawers, on your tables and desks, even in your refrigerator! He then leaves your home and hangs a sign on the door: "This house has been UPGRADED" Sadly, in so many cases, this is what the word "upgrade" has come to mean. Some product (usually software, though also such things as cars) is changed by not improved, and it is called an "upgrade". The 2007 version of Microsoft Office was a classic case to me -- I don't see any improvements in it, it simply means I have to discover the location to which all my familiar tools have been moved. A total waste of time. A DOWNGRADE. I would prefer that the word "upgrade" could only be conferred by a preponderance of USERS of products rather than the producers of them. Of course, enforcing such a requirement would be impractical. Perhaps we shall have to fall back on "genuine-upgrade" and "pseudo- upgrade" to make the distinction. -- Brett (in Berkeley, California, USA) http://www.100bestwebsites.org/ "The 100 finest sites on the Web, all in one place!" Widely-watched non-profit ranking of top Internet sites Berkeley Brett skrev: > I would prefer that the word "upgrade" could only be conferred by a > preponderance of USERS of products rather than the producers of them. > Of course, enforcing such a requirement would be impractical. Why did you upgrade?  SignatureBertel, Denmark > Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal > anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your > closets, in your drawers, on your tables and desks, even in your > refrigerator! What makes him a "thief"? > He then leaves your home and hangs a sign on the door: "This house has > been UPGRADED" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > location to which all my familiar tools have been moved. A total > waste of time. A DOWNGRADE. Did a thief break into your computer while you were out and install Office 2007? SignatureDavid > > Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal > > anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your > > closets, in your drawers, on your tables and desks, even in your > > refrigerator! > What makes him a "thief"? Obviously, his activities on other occasions. SignatureMark Brader "...but the past thousand years Toronto, msb@vex.net have been atypical." >>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Obviously, his activities on other occasions. Q: How do tell your house has been attacked by gay burglars? A: The furniture's been rearranged, and there's a quiche in the oven. SignatureMike. >>>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >>>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >A: The furniture's been rearranged, and there's a quiche in the oven. Answer B: He was in your drawers, as Mark mentioned. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >>>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >A: The furniture's been rearranged, and there's a quiche in the oven. And if your house has been invaded by Chinese vampires... the house has been rotated 7.26 degrees and there's a fang in your shoe. SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England >>>>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >>>>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >the house has been rotated 7.26 degrees and there's a fang in your >shoe. That gave me a fit of the giggles. Thank you. SignatureRichard Bollard Canberra Australia To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT. >>>>>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >>>>>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >That gave me a fit of the giggles. Thank you. Bless you, Richard. SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England > > Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal > > anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your > > closets, in your drawers, on your tables and desks, even in your > > refrigerator! > > What makes him a "thief"? Here, we have a crime called "breaking and entering". That's close enough to "thief" for me. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email >>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Here, we have a crime called "breaking and entering". That's close > enough to "thief" for me. That's a burglar. A thief has to thieve. SignatureDavid > >>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. �He doesn't steal > >>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > That's a burglar. �A thief has to thieve. The so-called upgrader stole your most precious commodity: your time, that is you spend a lot more time after the "upgrade". Arcadian Rises skrev: > > That's a burglar. ?A thief has to thieve. > The so-called upgrader stole your most precious commodity: your time, The time wasn't stolen. It was spent on a voluntary basis. That is what I don't understand. SignatureBertel, Denmark > The so-called upgrader stole your most precious commodity: your time, > that is you spend a lot more time after the "upgrade". A very good point.... -- Brett (in Berkeley, California, USA) http://www.electoralmaps.org/ Pictorial election results for every U.S. Presidential Election from George Washington to Barack Obama. > >>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal > >>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > That's a burglar. A thief has to thieve. Still close enough for me. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email John Varela filted: >> >>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >> >>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Still close enough for me. Maybe he's a thief but not very good at it....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Here, we have a crime called "breaking and entering". That's close > enough to "thief" for me. Maybe, but it is closer to burglary (breaking and entering with the intent to commit a felony). The intent may not have been brought to fruition. SignatureSkitt (AmE) >>>> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >>>> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Maybe, but it is closer to burglary (breaking and entering with the intent >to commit a felony). The intent may not have been brought to fruition. Yes, a "thief" is more likely to rob you on the street. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE > > Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal > > anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Did a thief break into your computer while you were out and install > Office 2007? Damn it, now it all makes sense... I still miss AmiPro, mind. DC -- > Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal > anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > "The 100 finest sites on the Web, all in one place!" > Widely-watched non-profit ranking of top Internet sites Microsoft Word 4.5, 5.0, 5.5 (which should have been 6.66), 6.0 -- none were real upgrades, only rearrangements of the hot keys and some downgrading of the product. One of them did actually put in one nice little touch -- the ability to type anything into the search-and- replace function, not just the characters on the keyboard, but that was of course removed from the next version. Then came Word for Windows, which proved to me that no one at MS knew anything about word processing at all. > I would prefer that the word "upgrade" could only be conferred by a > preponderance of USERS of products rather than the producers of them. > Of course, enforcing such a requirement would be impractical. A partial solution to your problem would be to not buy any software from Microsoft. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email >> I would prefer that the word "upgrade" could only be conferred by a >> preponderance of USERS of products rather than the producers of them. >> Of course, enforcing such a requirement would be impractical. > > A partial solution to your problem would be to not buy any software > from Microsoft. It could be close to a complete solution. I can think of only two non-Microsoft products where the release of a new version amounted to a major step backwards. The first was when Adobe successfully hid the "print" function, and I had to go to another computer, with an older version of Adobe reader, in order to print a document. (A colleague later, after a lot of searching, managed to find the "print", but he couldn't guarantee that he would remember how to do it next time.) The other was Thunderbird 3.0, which has undergone a major user-unfriendly redesign. Luckily I have kept a copy of version 2. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > The other was Thunderbird 3.0, which has undergone a major > user-unfriendly redesign. I liked the swing-wing design of Thunderbird 1, and the pod idea on Thunderbird 2 provides a brilliant model for project management, but, as my Dad would always point out, none of them would ever have flown. DC -- >> The other was Thunderbird 3.0, which has undergone a major >> user-unfriendly redesign. > > I liked the swing-wing design of Thunderbird 1, and the pod idea on > Thunderbird 2 provides a brilliant model for project management, but, > as my Dad would always point out, none of them would ever have flown. Never mind the hundreds of people over many months or years, and vast deliveries of supplies which it would have taken to set up the Island. Although only one Anthea Turner was needed when the Island was papier mâché. We eventually had to throw ours out as it had been colonised by some sort of flour-glue-eating beetles. SignatureDavid > Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal > anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > the location to which all my familiar tools have been moved. A > total waste of time. A DOWNGRADE. To each his own. I didn't like the ribbon interface at first, but it's starting to grow on me (and I miss the ability to dock toolbars; I suspect that they'll be back), but there are certainly some major improvements. Off the top of my head: - Word's new equation editor is very very nice, although much of what you can do with it (especially the keyboard based entry) is amazingly poorly documented (including an inexplicable decision not to have tool-tips display keyboard equivalents). You can essentially type TeX-ish equations to it and it does the right thing. - The output formats are now zipped XML archives, which means that they are much easier to process (and create) by other programs. - You can now output PDF files directly. - Word's document comparison finally really works. I can get a new draft of a long patent application back from the lawyer and just ask Word to compare it against the marked up version of the last draft I sent to them and it gives me a document with all of the changes marked. In prior versions, it would work for a few pages and then get confused and decide that what happened was that the rest of the original document was deleted and replaced by the text of the new. With 2007, I haven't seen it have problems no matter how complex the changes are, so I no longer have to count on other people correctly tracking changes. - I haven't played with it yet, but Word now has bibliography handling built in. - Excel finally dropped the limitation to 65,546 rows. (The new limit is 1,048,576.) This is a big deal to those of us who use it to analyze data. (It would be nice if they would give us another few orders of magnitude, but you can do a lot more with 1 Mrow than with 64 Krows.) - Conditional formatting in Excel is much nicer than it was. You can have as many rules as you want covering any cell (previously the limit was 3) and you can now easily do some pretty complicated things like having background shade from red to yellow between the minimum and median in a range and from yellow to green between the median and maximum. All in all, I think that cosmetically, it's a step backwards, but in terms of what it can do, it's a win. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Politicians are like compost--they 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |should be turned often or they start Palo Alto, CA 94304 |to smell bad. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >> Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal >> anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] >All in all, I think that cosmetically, it's a step backwards, but >in terms of what it can do, it's a win. Going off top: I've tried the Microsoft "upgrade", Microsoft Essentials. I like it a lot. For those who haven't heard of it, MSE is an antivirus program. It has been reviewed as comparable to Norton, McAfee and other commercial AV software. MSE is free and far less intrusive than NAV. My computers boot faster and get far fewer false positives. I tried it on one computer for a short time and was so impressed I replaced NAV with MSE on my remaining machines. As long as I'm off topic on free software, I recommend getting Revo Uninstaller (it does a very good job of cleaning trash leftover from uninstalls) and EASEUS Data Recovery Wizard (it does an excellent data recovery from disks that have been erased or damaged--it recently completely recovered a damaged partition on one of my drives). > For those who haven't heard of it, MSE is an antivirus program. Easy way to avoid viruses: get a Mac. 8-) SignatureErilar, biblioholic medievalist http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo >> For those who haven't heard of it, MSE is an antivirus program. > >Easy way to avoid viruses: get a Mac. 8-) Longing for the days of youth and innocence... Murray Arnow <arnow@iname.com>: >For those who haven't heard of it, MSE is an antivirus program. It has >been reviewed as comparable to Norton, McAfee and other commercial AV >software. MSE is free and far less intrusive than NAV. My computers boot >faster and get far fewer false positives. I tried it on one computer for >a short time and was so impressed I replaced NAV with MSE on my >remaining machines. Count me as another fan of MSE. I suspect that it's not as good as the commercial products if the user is a complete idiot. But for the sensible user who wants some low-impact reassurance, it's perfect. When you say "far fewer false positives" what are you referring to? Over many years' use of various AV products, I've only ever encountered two false positives, where the software said that a file contained a virus when it didn't. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England Hello Murray Arnow & Mike Barnes: Thanks for your thoughts on Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE). I use MSE on my home computers in tandem with an excellent little program called "Malwarebytes Anti-Malware" ( http://www.malwarebytes.org/ ). The two programs seem to run in parallel with no problems so far, even though MSE has its own internal anti-malware features. (I am fond of Malwarebytes because on two occasions it "caught" malware that had sneaked past Norton Antivirus on one of my work PCs (at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory -- a fairly high-risk environment for viruses/malware -- some say because of the high turnover of student assistants -- but for other reasons as well.) At Berkeley Lab, I continue to use Norton Antivirus, though the lab officially prefers Sophos antivirus (a product based in Abingdon, UK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophos & http://www.sophos.com/ ) One of the better antivirus comparison websites I've seen is: http://av-comparatives.org/ If you'd like to see their latest report (Dec 2009) in PDF format, here it is (page 15 of the report is the concise summary): http://av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/performance/performance_dec09.pdf or http://tinyurl.com/ye4n6kt But to save you the download, the report gives ratings of up to 3 stars for different antivirus programs (default installations) based on their tests (1 star is "Standard," 2 stars is "Advanced", 3 stars is "Advanced +"). To make any of the ratings, a program has to demonstrate high effectiveness against a known virus/malware set. So all these programs are considered quite good (many programs don't make the list at all). The higher rankings are reserved for effective programs that also do well in other tests: ease of use/installation, scanning speed, etc. Here is a summary of the overall results. I don't believe they are in any special order within the groups. [3 star programs: "Advanced+"]: AVIRA Kingsoft F-Secure Sophos Kaspersky Microsoft Avast Symantec ESET McAfee [2 star programs: "Advanced"]: Norman AVG BitDefender G DATA [1 star programs: "Standard"] eScan Trustport Of course, to really appreciate what these ratings represent, you would have to read the report a bit more carefully. Hope you are all in good spirits.... -- Brett (in Berkeley, California, USA) http://www.100bestwebsites.org/ "The 100 finest sites on the Web, all in one place!" Widely-watched non-profit ranking of top Internet sites Just a quick P.S. If you just want to see the virus/malware detection ratings for the programs (and are not so interested in speed, resource-consumption, etc.), you might see this PDF file: http://av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_report24.pdf Other specialty tests here: http://av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews In all these, MSE rates quite well. >Just a quick P.S. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >In all these, MSE rates quite well. Using information from that site I chose to use AVIRA. That was in 2008 before MSE had not been released. The relative positions of the AV programs in the rankings tend to vary from report to report. It is a race in which there is a leading group with the actual leader changing from time-to-time. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >> If you just want to see the virus/malware detection ratings for the >> programs (and are not so interested in speed, resource-consumption, >> etc.), you might see this PDF file: >> >> http://av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_report24.pdf I use Avast, and I've had no problems with it. When I try to look at the above comparisons, I get the message "There was an error opening this document. This viewer cannot decrypt this document". That's a message that I associate with web sites that insist on "bleeding edge" software, i.e. sites that value appearance over function. I would rather trust a web site that is less wedded to one commercial product. This, of course, is for my Windows laptop. I've never found any need for antivirus software for non-Windows computers. One of the things that drives me crazy about using my laptop is the huge overhead that one has to devote to handling both the deliberate and accidental security holes. For that reason, I use the laptop only once every two or three weeks. P.S. I see that I've incorrectly credited Peter Duncanson with the above words. Sorry; I've lost track of who wrote them. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >When I try to look at the > above comparisons, I get the message "There was an error opening this > document. This viewer cannot decrypt this document". That's a message > that I associate with web sites that insist on "bleeding edge" software, > i.e. sites that value appearance over function. I would rather trust a > web site that is less wedded to one commercial product. Thanks for your contribution, Peter. You might consider trying the free Foxit Reader program for PDF files. I find that it opens such files significantly more quickly than the default installation of Adobe Acrobat. If you wish to try it, you may download it here from Download.com (a generally very secure site): http://download.cnet.com/Foxit-Reader/3000-10743_4-10313206.html?tag=mncol or, if that doesn't work, here's a pointer: http://tinyurl.com/dayt8u Just incidentally, in my opinion one of the best (free) websites for tested free software (freeware) is: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/ I've found quite a number of jewels at this site. Here is their list of "The best of the best in freeware" for 2009: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2009/2009pl.php And their year-by-year comparisons ("PL2004," for example, means the software listed was on their 2004 list of best software. Much of this software can be found at Download.com.): http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2008/CumulativePL.php Best wishes.... >> When I try to look at the >> above comparisons, I get the message "There was an error opening this [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > http://download.cnet.com/Foxit-Reader/3000-10743_4-10313206.html?tag=mncol Thanks, but I can't use that. It appears to work only for Windows. I use OS/2. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > You might consider trying the free Foxit Reader program for PDF > files. I find that it opens such files significantly more quickly > than the default installation of Adobe Acrobat. If you wish to try > it, you may download it here from Download.com (a generally very > secure site): That way you might avoid many of the security holes in Acrobat as well! Like this one for example: <http://thejournal.com/articles/2010/01/08/adobe-to-release-fix-for-acrobat-secur ity-hole.aspx> > That way you might avoid many of the security holes in Acrobat as well! Security holes? Is that a M$ version? SignatureErilar, biblioholic medievalist http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo >> That way you might avoid many of the security holes in Acrobat as well! > >Security holes? Is that a M$ version? You should be so lucky: http://www.cmu.edu/computing/news/security/2008/nov/111708-2.html > >> That way you might avoid many of the security holes in Acrobat as well! > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://www.cmu.edu/computing/news/security/2008/nov/111708-2.html Lucky? I have spent many years avoiding M$-anything. SignatureErilar, biblioholic medievalist http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo > To each his own. I didn't like the ribbon interface at first, but > it's starting to grow on me (and I miss the ability to dock toolbars; > I suspect that they'll be back), but there are certainly some major > improvements. For anyone who is still struggling with finding commands on the ribbon, may I recommend these free downloads from Microsoft: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/training/HA102295841033.aspx There's one for each of the Office programs. They consist of a Flash animation of the Office 2003 toolbar. When you click on the desired command on that, the animation shows you where to find the equivalent on the 2007 ribbon. SignatureRegards John for mail: my initials plus a u e at tpg dot com dot au >Sadly, in so many cases, this is what the word "upgrade" has come to >mean. Some product (usually software, though also such things as [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >location to which all my familiar tools have been moved. A total >waste of time. A DOWNGRADE. Indeed. I was urged for the last couple of months to "upgrade" my cell phone. So I did. Only it was a downgrade. I complained. Full story at: http://khanya.wordpress.com/2010/01/08/gettin-a-new-cell-mobile-phone/ SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk In article <dae6b799-84a3-4ceb-bfa1-2956444dc1e2@n7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, > Imagine that a thief breaks in to your home. He doesn't steal > anything -- he simply rearranges everything: everything in your [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Perhaps we shall have to fall back on "genuine-upgrade" and "pseudo- > upgrade" to make the distinction. I wouldn't touch anything turned out by Microsoft with the proverbial 10-foot pole, but it seems that just about every piece of software I've ever used has suffered from such "upgrades". When I bought a new laptop and had to deal with OS 10+, I had to obtain some "upgrades". Fortunately, three of my four favorite programs have not suffered from the regular "upgrades" most popular ones are subjected to, but I haven't had a word processor I was happy with since ClarisWorks was downgraded to AppleWorks, and browsers are regularly downgraded. My experience with most "upgrades" is that the program is loaded with features I have no earthly use for, while the ones I used constantly are dropped. SignatureErilar, biblioholic medievalist http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo >In article ><dae6b799-84a3-4ceb-bfa1-2956444dc1e2@n7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >I wouldn't touch anything turned out by Microsoft with the proverbial >10-foot pole, After you pay the outrageous amounts Apple demands for their Macs, a decent piece of lumber could remain proverbial. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>In article >><dae6b799-84a3-4ceb-bfa1-2956444dc1e2@n7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >After you pay the outrageous amounts Apple demands for their Macs, a >decent piece of lumber could remain proverbial. If you don't need to be at the cutting edge, buy a second-hand one from EBay. I did that and it was cheaper than an OS upgrade and had the newer OS anyway. One thing that angered me with Adobe was that their Acrobat download web page had the "install Google toolbar" option checked. Trouble is that was a Windows application. Two people I know, who had Macs, didn't notice this and had their browsers wrecked when the non-Mac software was loaded. It was not easy to fix. They still have the check box pre-selected but as far as I can tell using this Windows box, if you tell them you want a Mac version, it now takes you to a page without the Google option. They appear to have responded to complaints. SignatureRichard Bollard Canberra Australia To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT. > One thing that angered me with Adobe was that their Acrobat download > web page had the "install Google toolbar" option checked. Trouble is > that was a Windows application. Don't worry about it. Even Windows users consider the Google toolbar to be a virus. Besides, you really shouldn't install the Adobe reader. Adobe has now admitted that their PDF reader has a bug (all operating systems) that allows malware to be installed without your knowledge. They haven't yet found a fix. (ObNerd: if they had used any programming language except C or C++, the array subscript overflow would have caused a run-time exception. If we could convince our software suppliers to use a high-level language for their work, most of these exploits would have been impossible.) OS/2 has not yet been hit by this, but both Windows and Mac users are vulnerable. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > Besides, you really shouldn't install the Adobe reader. Adobe has now > admitted that their PDF reader has a bug (all operating systems) that [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > been impossible.) OS/2 has not yet been hit by this, but both Windows > and Mac users are vulnerable. There's no need for the Adobe Reader if you have a Mac. I just checked, and Preview now lets you insert and save data in a form, then reopen that form and add or edit data. That was the only important feature (for me -- for tax filing) that was missing in prior versions of Preview. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email > One thing that angered me with Adobe was that their Acrobat download > web page had the "install Google toolbar" option checked. Trouble is > that was a Windows application. A friend of mine, a Windows user, had the same problem. It takes an unfortunate experience to discover that the Google toolbar is Evil. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >> One thing that angered me with Adobe was that their Acrobat download >> web page had the "install Google toolbar" option checked. Trouble is >> that was a Windows application. > > A friend of mine, a Windows user, had the same problem. It takes an > unfortunate experience to discover that the Google toolbar is Evil. As one who uses it all the time, how so? SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Never attempt to teach a pig to 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |sing; it wastes your time and Palo Alto, CA 94304 |annoys the pig. | Robert Heinlein kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>> One thing that angered me with Adobe was that their Acrobat download >>> web page had the "install Google toolbar" option checked. Trouble is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > As one who uses it all the time, how so? My web browser already has too many unnecessary "features". I don't want it even more cluttered. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >>>> One thing that angered me with Adobe was that their Acrobat download >>>> web page had the "install Google toolbar" option checked. Trouble is [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > My web browser already has too many unnecessary "features". I don't want > it even more cluttered. Sorry, I forgot to add the most important reason. For some reason the Google toolbar is distributed with a number of unrelated applications. That means that people frequently end up installing it when they didn't intend to. That's what makes it Evil. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. Peter Moylan <gro.nalyomp@retep.?.invalid>: >>>>> One thing that angered me with Adobe was that their Acrobat download >>>>> web page had the "install Google toolbar" option checked. Trouble is [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >That means that people frequently end up installing it when they didn't >intend to. That's what makes it Evil. That makes those installers evil. It doesn't make the Google toolbar evil. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England Peter Moylan wrote, in <5M-dndF9dsI6vf_WnZ2dnUVZ7vNi4p2d@westnet.com.au> on Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:41:26 +1100: > >>>> One thing that angered me with Adobe was that their Acrobat download > >>>> web page had the "install Google toolbar" option checked. Trouble is [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > That means that people frequently end up installing it when they didn't > intend to. That's what makes it Evil. Such applications seem to always come with the option to install it selected so you have to watch out for it. I wouldn't mind if it weren't the default. So far I have managed to intercept it so I have no idea if it is in fact any use. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE >>>> One thing that angered me with Adobe was that their Acrobat download >>>> web page had the "install Google toolbar" option checked. Trouble is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > My web browser already has too many unnecessary "features". I don't want > it even more cluttered. Then I'd get rid of the unnecessary features. This one is damn useful and well worth a line of screen real estate. It gives me a box I can use to directly and easily search the Google, Google Books, the OED, MWCD11, the Google Usenet archive, my old usenet posts, Wikipedia, and several other sites, it makes it easy to highlight terms on the page, it has a facility for translating pages with one button, it has a button to go up levels on the web site, it has a very nice auto-fill feature, including being able to deal with several addresses and (password-protected) credit cards. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Sorry, captain. Convenient 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |technobabble levels are dangerously Palo Alto, CA 94304 |low. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.