After spending the last aggravating hour looking for
my windows reinstallation disk, I began wondering
if the billions that Gates is giving to charity is enough
to keep him from burning in hell.

Why is it that people are spending billions on
Microsoft and Office when Office 97 is no longer
even supported? Are people just stupid or is
Microsoft just evil? Why isnt Office 97 no longer
supported?

At the moment I happen to be relying on Office 97,
and it is not in the least bit comforting that Microsoft
no longer supports it.

I also know that Linux is the alternative to Microsoft
that would save people mountains of aggravation,
but since collectively people are morons or Microsoft
is incredibly evil, the vast majority of people are using
Microsoft. If Linux was the standard, people would
no longer have to worry that Office 97 was no longer
supported.

Do people enjoy having ulcers, Are people stupid?
And for how long will Bill Gates burn in hell?

Why should an almost 10 year old program (Office 97) still be supported?
10 years in the computer world is the equivalent of at least 100 years
in the non-computer world. Find me anything in the price range of Office
97 that is still being maintained & supported 100 years later.
It's not Microsoft's fault, if you can't keep any order in your stuff
and can't find your Windows disk. You should have taken better care of
what you bought.

Patrick Schmid
--------------
http://pschmid.net

"Tom" wrote in message
:

After spending the last aggravating hour looking for
my windows reinstallation disk, I began wondering
if the billions that Gates is giving to charity is enough
to keep him from burning in hell.

Why is it that people are spending billions on
Microsoft and Office when Office 97 is no longer
even supported? Are people just stupid or is
Microsoft just evil? Why isnt Office 97 no longer
supported?

At the moment I happen to be relying on Office 97,
and it is not in the least bit comforting that Microsoft
no longer supports it.

I also know that Linux is the alternative to Microsoft
that would save people mountains of aggravation,
but since collectively people are morons or Microsoft
is incredibly evil, the vast majority of people are using
Microsoft. If Linux was the standard, people would
no longer have to worry that Office 97 was no longer
supported.

Do people enjoy having ulcers, Are people stupid?
And for how long will Bill Gates burn in hell?

10 years in the computer world is the equivalent of at least 100 years in
the non-computer world.

Where do you get these statistics? Just curious. It's quite a claim - ten
years equals a hundred years.

Not that I'm supporting the OP's silly diatribe, mind you.

Here are some options for Office suites if you'd like.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari..._office_suites

Are people just stupid or is Microsoft just evil?

If someone just bought Office 97 now, then perhaps stupid might come into
play, but even then probably not.

Like most of the other Office application options, you can still get peer
support for Office 97 in forums like this in spite of yourself.



"Tom" wrote in message
...
After spending the last aggravating hour looking for
my windows reinstallation disk, I began wondering
if the billions that Gates is giving to charity is enough
to keep him from burning in hell.

Why is it that people are spending billions on
Microsoft and Office when Office 97 is no longer
even supported? Are people just stupid or is
Microsoft just evil? Why isnt Office 97 no longer
supported?

At the moment I happen to be relying on Office 97,
and it is not in the least bit comforting that Microsoft
no longer supports it.

I also know that Linux is the alternative to Microsoft
that would save people mountains of aggravation,
but since collectively people are morons or Microsoft
is incredibly evil, the vast majority of people are using
Microsoft. If Linux was the standard, people would
no longer have to worry that Office 97 was no longer
supported.

Do people enjoy having ulcers, Are people stupid?
And for how long will Bill Gates burn in hell?

I thought I was being conservative with 10 = 100 years.
Let's try the following: According to Moore's Law, the transistor
density of semiconductor chips doubles roughly every 18 months. It has
been mostly true (for 41 years now). For more details on it and the
argument about it, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law

That means in the 10 year time-span, chip power has increased roughly by
a factor of 2^6.6 or 97. If you take Moore's Law as an indicator for
innovation in the computer industry, name me some other industry that
has become almost 100 times better/faster/more efficient (in other words
more innovative) within 10 years.
Let me give you a comparison:
The first real rocket (the German V2) had a speed of around four times
the speed of sound (when dropping from its top altitude). That's roughly
1361 m/s. The highest speed attained by a manned vehicle is 11.080 m/s
(Apollo 10). That's a factor 8 increase. The first successful V2 launch
was in 1942. Apollo 10 was in 1969. Hence we have a factor 8 increase
over 27 years. That means over 27 years, the annual factor was 1.08. The
18 month factor was 1.3.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-2_rocket
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_10

We can take this even further. The fastest Wright brothers flight on the
day of the first flight (December 17, 1903) was 279 meters in 59
seconds. That's 4.7 m/s. Compared to Apollo 10, we have a factor of 2357
over 66 years. So we got that factor over 44 * 18 months. If you do the
math, then you get a factor of 1.2 every 18 months.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers

If we use the 19 month factor of 1.3, we end up with around 26 years.

But let's look at today. In 2006, Apollo 10 is still the fastest manned
vehicle. So we get 103 years with a 2357 factor. That's an 18 month
factor of 1.11985. To get a factor of 97, we now need 40 years.

This is the best case example I could find.

The picture looks much bleaker if you look at land speed record. The
first car Gottlieb Daimler built in 1885 reached 12 km/h. The land speed
record is 1.228 km/h (1997). That's a factor of 102 over 112 years. I
would argue that most industries innovate at that pace.

Patrick Schmid
--------------
http://pschmid.net

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottlieb_Daimler
http://www.speed101.com/now/fastest_0127_6.htm

"Rose Madder" RoseMadder at Gmail.com wrote in message
:

10 years in the computer world is the equivalent of at least 100 years in
the non-computer world.

Where do you get these statistics? Just curious. It's quite a claim - ten
years equals a hundred years.

Not that I'm supporting the OP's silly diatribe, mind you.

Thanks for the laugh.

Regards
Mark Dormer

"Tom" wrote in message
...
After spending the last aggravating hour looking for
my windows reinstallation disk, I began wondering
if the billions that Gates is giving to charity is enough
to keep him from burning in hell.

Why is it that people are spending billions on
Microsoft and Office when Office 97 is no longer
even supported? Are people just stupid or is
Microsoft just evil? Why isnt Office 97 no longer
supported?

At the moment I happen to be relying on Office 97,
and it is not in the least bit comforting that Microsoft
no longer supports it.

I also know that Linux is the alternative to Microsoft
that would save people mountains of aggravation,
but since collectively people are morons or Microsoft
is incredibly evil, the vast majority of people are using
Microsoft. If Linux was the standard, people would
no longer have to worry that Office 97 was no longer
supported.

Do people enjoy having ulcers, Are people stupid?
And for how long will Bill Gates burn in hell?

I'm curious as to how it applies to office 97.

If the program works for the user, on the users equipment, it's age doesn't
matter. Neither does official support - every known problem should be in
Google by now and assistance for the few that aren't (or can't be found) can
be found in forums such as this - no need to bother with Microsoft - they'll
probably get it wrong anyway.

Availability of support from MS is low on my list of reasons to upgrade from
older products - actually, it's not even on my list of reasons to upgrade.

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/
Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/

Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/
Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com
Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter:



"Rose Madder" RoseMadder at Gmail.com wrote in message
...
10 years in the computer world is the equivalent of at least 100 years in
the non-computer world.

Where do you get these statistics? Just curious. It's quite a claim - ten
years equals a hundred years.

Not that I'm supporting the OP's silly diatribe, mind you.

Tom wrote:
After spending the last aggravating hour looking for
my windows reinstallation disk, I began wondering
if the billions that Gates is giving to charity is enough
to keep him from burning in hell.

Why is it that people are spending billions on
Microsoft and Office when Office 97 is no longer
even supported? Are people just stupid or is
Microsoft just evil? Why isnt Office 97 no longer
supported?
I will defer to the experts in the group, but I feel that old products
are no longer supported because of the concept of planned obsolescence.
(see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence
http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/sbede...s/engcol8.html and a
commentary at
http://forevergeek.com/apple/snl_par...solescence.php)
I can understand the situation from Microsoft's point of view (keep
revenue flowing in order to fund new development, keep stockholders
happy) and the viewpoint of consumers (paid a lot of money for
software/hardware, only to have a "new and improved version" come out a
short time later).

At the moment I happen to be relying on Office 97,
and it is not in the least bit comforting that Microsoft
no longer supports it.

I also know that Linux is the alternative to Microsoft
that would save people mountains of aggravation,
but since collectively people are morons or Microsoft
is incredibly evil, the vast majority of people are using
Microsoft. If Linux was the standard, people would
no longer have to worry that Office 97 was no longer
supported.
Consumers drive the market. The belief is that Windows is easy to use,
with applications being easy to install. If these are their priorities,
then I certainly cannot fault them for supporting Microsoft. When the
day comes that Linux has the same perceived ease of use, then perhaps
the market will shift at that time.

Do people enjoy having ulcers, Are people stupid?
People do not enjoy having ulcers. As for people's intelligence, with
the exception of a few politicians, I find that the average person is
quite well informed.

And for how long will Bill Gates burn in hell?
In an email sent using Outlook 8.02, the Evil One stated that Bill is
not expected to be a guest.

In ,
Tom typed:
After spending the last aggravating hour looking for
my windows reinstallation disk, I began wondering
if the billions that Gates is giving to charity is enough
to keep him from burning in hell.

Why is it that people are spending billions on
Microsoft and Office when Office 97 is no longer
even supported? Are people just stupid or is
Microsoft just evil? Why isnt Office 97 no longer
supported?

At the moment I happen to be relying on Office 97,
and it is not in the least bit comforting that Microsoft
no longer supports it.

I also know that Linux is the alternative to Microsoft
that would save people mountains of aggravation,
but since collectively people are morons or Microsoft
is incredibly evil, the vast majority of people are using
Microsoft. If Linux was the standard, people would
no longer have to worry that Office 97 was no longer
supported.

Do people enjoy having ulcers, Are people stupid?
And for how long will Bill Gates burn in hell?


If you lose the keys to your Taurus and have to drive your Model A to work,
do you blame Ford?
Do you really care all that much about your local dealership having parts
for the Model A if it's running sufficiently well to get you to the office?

You tell us - you will apparently be there long before him.

--�
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, Tom asked:

And for how long will Bill Gates burn in hell?