Re: A good arg (IMHO), for avoiding "secret / vendor-lock-in…

> At the place where I am working now, we use a software tool
> (for comparing data files) called  "Beyond Compare"
> [version 2.0.2 (build 180)].
> It comes with an "About" screen that says
> << Copyright (c) 1996-2003 Scooter Software
>      All rights reserved
>      www.scootersoftware.com >>
> and the "credits" list a bunch of other co.'s that presumably contributed
> in some way (or, - could it be? - maybe they sold [licensed?] the rights
> (or should I be saying "conveyed"?  I'm not up on the latest!!)
> on condition that the user / reseller [Scooter Software] would list
> them in the credits?)
> and some of them [credits] come with hyper links to various URLs,
> but some of the links are broken (403), (e.g.) and one that I "did" find
> that still worked, was in 'auf Deutsch'.  (German) [as in, ".de"]
>     One of the things I found interesting about this, and the reason why I
> got the idea to mention it here, is the fact that, right at the beginning
> of their on-line help, they have 2 links, to
> Sample uses of Beyond Compare
> What Beyond Compare DOESN'T Do
> and I did not spend much time checking the "Sample uses of Beyond Compare".
> [...SNIP... boring stuff...] my main comment is not about that.
>     My main comment is about: the list of
>      **!!** ----->> "What Beyond Compare DOESN'T Do".  <<-----  **!!**
> Check this:  [begin quote:]
> What Beyond Compare DOESN'T Do
> Beyond Compare cannot compare MS Word, MS Excel or Adobe PDF documents
> side-by-side. These have complex, proprietary formats that BC doesn't
> understand. However, if you first save documents as text files, BC can
> compare their contents.
> Beyond Compare does not run on a Mac, at least not natively. Users
> have reported some success running BC under VirtualPC. For OS/2 fans,
> BC can be relinked using Odin, with few problems. We do not currently
> have a Unix version of BC, although we have plans to develop a Linux
> version.
> Beyond Compare does not do 3-way compares, or automated source code
> merging. [: end quote].
> BOTTOM LINE:
> Another good argument (IMHO), for avoiding
>     "secret / vendor-lock-in" proprietary formats!
> PS:  I remembered to change my "mode switch" to "Plain Text"
>     before sending this message, but if anyone wants to see
>     the original version that I typed, as an ".rtf" file
>     (circa 3K bytes),   it is available.
>     (maybe rtf was "once" a mysterious format, but
>      by today's standards, it is far from being a
>      "secret / vendor-lock-in" proprietary format.)
>    (in fact, according to
>        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Text_Format
>     it says that RTF "is a proprietary document file format",
>     but then it also says: "Most word processors are able
>     to read and write RTF documents.")
>    (so no co. is going to be able to hold your data
>      hostage now, if some of it is "in" that "format").
> In fact, I tried to "attach" it (that .rtf file)
> as an attachment to this PLUG-Discuss e-mail message.
> I am not sure whether that worked (does the list server
> support that?)  but if not, then just let me know
> if you want to see  the ".rtf" file,
> (circa 3K bytes!:)
> and I can probably just go to my "SENT Items" folder,
> and forward you the copy
> [er, um original] with the ".rtf" file as an attachment.