I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. I haven't looked at my computer containing Ubuntu within Windows for a couple of months so I could be mistaken. As far as I remember the Ubuntu CD comes with an option to load Ubuntu directly without any file system changes (uses NTFS). I can't remember for sure but I thought it loaded using 'Grub loader' but I'll check when I've got time.
As I said previously, the main advantage of loading this version of Ubuntu directly into Windows is that it provides a virtually risk-free and easy way to try Ubuntu. Easy loading is one of the main advantages of Ubuntu and one of the reasons why so many people are trying it instead of other more established versions of Linux.
How many documents do you see with manually inserted cross references or tables of content? Manually numbered sections headings? Manual applied fonts and type styles? Spaces used to try and affect layout or widow and orphan control? There are plenty of other examples I am sure you could imagine[2]. I am not saying this is the users fault necessarily, they have probably never been tought how to do these things or realised how many hours they would save if they just spent the occasional 20 mins experimenting with how the software works and what the features are for.
Obviously false.
I grant that there are many many people who could achieve exactly the same level of productivity with older versions, but to claim that is generally true for all is taking it too far.
Lets face it, there are still masses of features *missing* from the latest version that are well over due[1] - whether they of any concern to you however will depend greatly on what you do, and what you expect from a word processor.
[1] Last time I looked anyway, although I will admit I have not studied
2007 particularly closely.
[2] I worked with a chap years ago, where he would create hanging indents using a fixed width font, and using spaces (not even tabs). The documents looked fine until some poor soul came along and needed to make a one word alteration, and three pages of formatting just collapsed in front of their eyes! Another trick was creating tables using manually inserted IBM box graphic characters in left aligned text - so all the table borders moved around as you edited anything.
Yes, but they generally haven't upgraded because the copy they have meets their needs - except for handling docs from "outside" where people have upgraded.
Which is of course how software companies seem to get a lot of their money - one person/business upgrades and then everyone they interact with finds they're pressured into doing so, too, regardless of whether what they have meets their needs perfectly well. Grumble :(
(thanks to others re. plugin - I'll mention that next time it's needed as it'll save me some hassle!)
But the single worst thing is that you can make Word's formatting fall flat on its face without even touching the document itself. Change default printer, or have no default printer, or don't have required fonts available (whether by being embedded or installed).
Which is why I have spent such hideously large amounts of time pissing about with 'foreign'[1] documents trying to make them usable.
Which is why I have often resorted to installing CutePDF to provide a single, standard default printer that does not need to consider the real available printers.
[1] With foreign typically meaning from the US with their US Letter obsession but also including just about any document not created on that computer.
I have Vmware. and 6 virtual screens. One is called 'windows'.
It works very well for the three Windows programs I cant duplicate outside of Windows.
If using VMware, your Linux system is a mountable shared drive. The Windows 'disk' is not accessible from Linux.
This is actually father good. Forces you to put all data on that share, and means that the windows installation is relatively static. This, combined with the natty 'snapshot' feature of VMware - which stores a complete copy of the windows virtual disk as a compressed backup somewhere - means that if windows gets screwed, you 'revert from snapshot' - a matter of a few seconds, and its back where it was..
geoff gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
My personal favourite at the moment is products which require you to enter the key - accept it if it's a valid one - then, once you've installed the app, check online if it's in use elsewhere, whinging if it is - but not giving you any opportunity to check which of the dozen keys you've got for a dozen licences for a dozen machines (one of which you're reinstalling) is in use on which machine. Oh, and you need to uninstall and reinstall to change the key.
Step forward, MS Office 2008 for Mac, and take a bow.
Do you mean that Ubuntu (having been installed into Windows via 'Wubi') can be run completely within Windows as a standalone programme / OS? This was basically the question asked by 'John' above and about which I expressed doubts.
As I understand it Wubi is a Windows installer which simply installs Ubuntu into Windows and creates a dual boot system. This isn't the same thing as running Ubuntu OS as an application within Windows in the same way as running something like MsPaint, Notepad, etc.
Most non-techies (and a few techies!) think that menas 'text typed in MS Word'. Word is the universal document handler- Some users in at my workplace genuinely think you can open *anything* in word and edit it.
Well indeed, but don't underestimate the number of people that think HTML email looks 'more professional' or 'better' with all that tat in.
I have RISC OS on this Vista machine, it uses the vista as a base but runs RISC OS apps, RISC OS printer and network drivers and the Acorn 3 button mouse system.
But I can leave it on the task bar if I want to use Safari or Opera etc. and then return to RISCOS with a click on the task bar.
With Ubuntu on an XP box I can see the xp drives etc, but to use a windows prog I have to re-start the machine. (Actually I think I prefer Mandriva anyway)
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.