Post #67,738
12/10/02 1:03:18 AM
|
Well there goes another big company to the wayside
as IBM just mothballs it next to Lotus and other companies that it bought out. Ask IBM when it will make a version of Lotus Office for Linux or OS/2, and then wait until the luaghter dies down. IBM won't even eat their own dog food, or port it to the other Non-Windows operating systems that they support.
Java is Sun's dog food that they themselves won't even eat. Imagine that!
|
Post #67,929
12/10/02 7:41:52 PM
|
Re: Off beam - lets be fair about this
Can you show where IBM failed to meet its finacial targets for its Lotus products.
The company took notes from 100,000 seats to over 1,000,000 seats in about 3-4 years. That seems to me to be a very successful aquisition (you do realise that IBM was primarily after 'notes' - if not then read Lou Gerstner's book published recently where he states the reason for the Lotus buyout and the effect it had on IBM's bottom line).
Cheers
Doug Marker
|
Post #68,066
12/11/02 7:25:59 AM
|
OT: Wow, Doug, you're a LOT cuter than I'd have thought! :-)
|
Post #68,068
12/11/02 7:34:50 AM
|
naw, floggin one of the grands :-)
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
Opera was the television of the nineteenth century:loud, vulgar and garish with plots that could only be called infantile. "Pendergast"
|
Post #68,501
12/12/02 9:42:41 PM
|
Re: CRC - please accept my appology - was a trick
used to tease Mike in the War on terrorism thread where we are beating each other's brains out over him accusing me of spreading 'Chinese wispers'.
As you can now see I have posted my former pic (stopped using it about 30 months ago).
So in case anyone is wondering about you ref to me being 'cute' I had used Miss HK 2000's pic & left it up for 2 days.
Yes that was naughty & I am guilty.
Cheers
Doug
|
Post #68,571
12/13/02 3:51:36 AM
12/13/02 3:52:21 AM
|
Figured; just kidding, "SHE is cute!". No apologies needed.
Edited by CRConrad
Dec. 13, 2002, 03:52:21 AM EST
|
Post #68,092
12/11/02 10:15:42 AM
|
Re: Off beam - lets be fair about this
Is that your daughter? "Niece"? Agent? Boss? Bookie? Bartender?
Looks kinda like a young Jackie Bisset (ahhh)!
-drl
|
Post #68,506
12/12/02 9:46:33 PM
|
Re PIC - See other explanations I posted - BUT, I did find
The pic of you & I at Linux World 1999.
Will ost a link to it later.
Cheers
Doug
|
Post #68,516
12/12/02 10:24:37 PM
|
Re: Re PIC - See other explanations I posted - BUT
Put it up! I need a Net reference to my physical existence.
-drl
|
Post #68,168
12/11/02 2:48:13 PM
|
OT: Must you be that cute?
It gives me impure thoughts :)
--
We have only 2 things to worry about: That
things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
|
Post #68,508
12/12/02 9:49:29 PM
|
Re: She does me too :-)
As you have probably gather from other posts I used the pic while at war with Mike in the Terrorism thread, Thought I would tease him a bit. Not sure if it woked but it did reply back with a lead in of Kissykissy so maybe it did trigger a reaction <grin>
Anyway as already stated that was Miss HK 2000
Cheers
Doug
|
Post #67,936
12/10/02 8:03:52 PM
|
Notes and Linux.
That's a complicated tale. I'm not really sure about this, but I think the actual coders for Notes never were Lotus employees: they are a separate company. I daresay IBM management would probably like a Notes client on Linux, but the Notes coders keep saying "no way". They cite the fact that converting Domino (the Notes server) to Linux was far harder than they expected.
When I was supporting Domino (on Linux) I and a few others kept asking in the Lotus forums when a Linux client would be coming out. It was getting uncomfortable for Lotus to keep saying "probably never". But they wouldn't budge.
Wade.
"Ah. One of the difficult questions."
|
Post #68,121
12/11/02 11:32:39 AM
|
Considering just what a bloated piece of...
...shite the Notes client was when I used it (R5) - I'm not surprised they couldn't port it to Linux.
As the [link|http://www.iarchitect.com/lotus.htm|Interface Hall of Shame] states about 4.6, "We wish we found IBM's Lotus Notes a long time ago. This single application could have formed the basis for the entire site. The interface is so problematic, one might reasonably conclude that the designers had previously visited this site, and misread "Hall of Shame" as "Hall of Fame". Lotus Notes 4.6 contains almost every example of inefficient design illustrated thoughout the entire Hall of Shame site."
R5 didn't seem to be much of an improvement over 4.6 - slow, buggy, and horrible - and that's just the e-mail package.
One of these days, I'll have to sit down and figure out why people use it. It probably has to do with the server, because I can't see an ounce of value in the client.
"...the middle of fighting a war against religious extremism is not the time to do something offensive to God." - Some idiot.
|
Post #68,175
12/11/02 3:14:28 PM
|
You should have tried 3.x
I was working for a Fortune 100 company at the time they decided to adopt Lotus Notes. They hired Coopers and Lybrand's Notes ubergoob to come and 'splain Notes development to us. He started off by saying, "Before we begin, you must all keep one thing in mind. Lotus Notes does poorly what no other software does at all. Remember that. Lotus Notes does poorly what no other software does at all."
I remember thinking, "Well, with advocacy like that, there's no stopping this product."
|
Post #68,281
12/11/02 10:12:22 PM
|
Please, I'm trying to forget! :)
Alex
"Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these."\t-- Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18)
|
Post #68,033
12/11/02 12:49:35 AM
|
I'm not running Lotus' office suite for OS/2?
[link|http://www.lotus.com/products/smartsuiteos2.nsf|Funny, I could have sworn I was...]
Darrell Spice, Jr.
[link|http://home.houston.rr.com/spiceware/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
