too much fantasy
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| grouch Jul 23, 2006 8:48 PM EDT |
The article must be talking about some fantasy MS rather than the real one. "Microsoft has kept the same look and feel for not just Windows, but for almost all of its applications." Since when? How many mutations of just MS Windows have there been? "Microsoft has kept its Office formats consistent enough through the years that the newer applications can read the older formats, and they are all easily identifiable." On another planet, this might be true. On this planet, even MS virus writers have to pick a target: Office 97, Office 97 SR1, Office 2000, Office XP (aka Office 2002). The MS Office format churn has been one of MS's anti-competitive weapons and a big driving force for selling upgrades. They have used the format changes like a virus, getting the CEO infected so he/she causes all the underlings to have to change just to read the memos from on high. "The fourth item, in my opinion, is the biggest reason why Linux isn't as popular as it could be: marketing." That depends on how you define "marketing". The article defines it in terms of advertisements. The slush fund to combat GNU/Linux adoption, the "news" and "research" plants, the deliberate bastardization of standards to preclude would-be competitors, the lobbying of governments, the "donations" of software to educational institutions that threaten to switch to GNU/Linux, and the site licenses that charge for every PC that *might* run MS Windows have more effect on keeping non-MS systems out of businesses, governments and educational institutions than advertisements do. What can Linux learn from Microsoft? How to deceive and misinform users? No, thank you. How to create deliberate incompatibility to lock-in people's data? No, please. How to spread false information about other systems? Definitely not wanted. How to threaten users with lawsuits over artificial limitations created by a EULA? Not interested. How to make a system more controllable by every con-artist, spammer and dysfunctional script-kiddie than it is by the one who rented the system? I'd rather smash my thumb with a hammer than use such a thing. Let's don't go backwards in imitation of an illegally maintained, predatory monopoly. Let the dark ages of computing end. GNU/Linux gets the most important aspect right: It respects the software user as the rightful master of the computer, including the software. That foundation leads to all the improvements that users desire and can imagine. |
| mecrider Jul 24, 2006 2:49 AM EDT |
If you follow the links to Vaughan-Nichols' column, he concludes it with "Just because many Linux fans hate Microsoft, doesn't mean we can't learn a lot from the Evil Empire. We can, and we should." You have just listed a few of many things we don't want to learn from MS. There are many mutations of Windows, but when it comes to basic look-and-feel, not much has changed since 95. In dialog boxes, there are two basic flavors: 9x and NT4-5.x (aka 2k and XP). In Linux, there is KDE and Gnome (which has changed drastically even in recent years, mostly for the better), but many more programmers roll their own dialog boxes than in the Windows world. My non-technically-inclined users get confused jumping from OOo to Gimp to Scribus to Acrobat Reader. From Vaughan-Nichols' perspective, if he works in a world that has standardized on XP, which has changed little over the past almost five years since it was released, it may be easier to forget how much things have changed since 95. I work in a business that still uses 98 and NT alongside 2003 and XP, so as IT support I see it all and have to work in it all every day. As far as Office formats, there is some compatibility breakage from version to version (even though Microsoft says there isn't), but in practice we have had little trouble exchanging documents with users of all recent versions, even though we still only run Office 97. In comparison, do you expect OOo 1.1.5 users (still the newest version in up-to-date installs of RHEL4 and its many clones) to read documents produced in the then-latest OOo of 9 years from now? Some Linux users I know trumpet not being forced to upgrade with every new version release, but there is probably more changes and more compatibility breakage over a similar period of time in Linux programs than in MS programs. That being said, I don't necessarily believe that is a bad thing. I wouldn't want to give up any of the improvements I have seen in recent years, which is why I run lots of beta software on my personal boxes. Once again, in your response to marketing, you immediately move from what Vaughan-Nichols points out to the many aspects of MS that he intentionally left out. I agree that the bad things about MS have probably, unfortunately, taken them farther than the few good things Vaughan-Nichols listed, and I hope these will eventually be their downfall. However, it is always possible to learn something from the little good that can be found in MS. That is why we see articles and blog entries on this subject show up so often. |
| dcparris Jul 24, 2006 6:29 AM EDT |
I just want to focus momentarily on the issue of not being forced to upgrade. The irony is that, with FOSS, an organization can typically better afford to upgrade, since the license costs are usually nil. Sample Scenario: Office97 --> Office 2000 = $300/user (5 users) = $1500 OOo 1.x --> OOo 2.x = $0/user (5 users) = $0 I'm not sure what most larger organizations wind up paying for MS Office. Is it much cheaper than $300? The migration labor & transition costs would likely be fairly close, so I'm omitting it. At worst, migration labor for OOo might offset the license savings somewhat. I am not sure if you can push out OOo to users in the same way you can for MS office, or how easily that is accomplished. So, even though people aren't forced to upgrade, it would seem much more feasible to do so. |
| jdixon Jul 24, 2006 8:02 AM EDT |
> I am not sure if you can push out OOo to users in the same way you can for MS office, or how easily that is accomplished. For most businesses, you probably can. Small businesses of 20 or fewer employees probably simply manually install the software as required. Larger businesses probably have some type of automated installation software they use which should be able to handle OpenOffice as easily as any other program. Editted so my last sentence makes some sense. :) |
| SFN Jul 24, 2006 9:00 AM EDT |
You can do it with Active Directory. I just crack myself up. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 24, 2006 9:43 AM EDT |
SFn, me too :) |
| flufferbeer Jul 24, 2006 10:35 AM EDT |
FYI, the article LXer uses is Matt Mondok's 'M-Dollar' comment on Vaughan-Nichols' article.
The actual link to Vaughan-Nichols' original Linux Watch column is http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS5991301042.html IMHO, besides Vaughan-Nichols' "Top five things Linux can learn from Microsoft", there a very-related Sixth Thing : Having the most Killer Apps Have any of you LXer readers checked out one of the main LinuxQuestions.org highlighted forum questions: "What programs would you like to see ported to Linux?" If not, the link is http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?t=105... At last count, there were over a HUNDRED PAGES of app requests -- 100+ PAGES, not separate forum messages you all!!!!! Sure seems to this LX reader from the LQ list that a WHOLE LOT of people would start to use GNU/Linux instead of M$ Windows if not for those one or more make-or-break gotta-have-it-now apps. A deficient Beta or a sloppy WINE version of such a Killer App just won't cut it -- better safe than sorry no matter how free/open the SW is or however many new updates are just around the corner!! |
| tuxchick2 Jul 24, 2006 10:57 AM EDT |
"Having the most Killer Apps" Which has what to do with FOSS? I'm not sure I understand your point here- if a vendor refuses to release a Linux port, there's not much anyone can do about it. What are you suggesting as a solution? |
| grouch Jul 24, 2006 11:37 AM EDT |
100+ pages. Wow. With that many pages of questions and requests from newbies, intermingled with responses, there just *has* to be a "Killer Apps" deficit. I mean, just look at that big number. Surely, even filtering out duplicate requests, nonsense and replies, there would be at least 50 pages, give or take a dozen or two. That's still a big number, so GNU/Linux must be, well, crippled, right? Sure, lots of requests appear to be newbies who ask for an "app" by brand and name, rather than by function or task to be accomplished, and thus are illustrating a familiarity problem, instead of an "app" shortage problem. It's pretty certain that some of those requests come from people who are only looking for a free (gratis) version of what they've been using; they're just here for the EULA, not to learn a different mouse movement. Still, it's certainly an impressive number. Not nearly as impressive as eleventy-thirteen, though. Now THAT'S a number! |
| dcparris Jul 24, 2006 12:08 PM EDT |
> Have any of you LXer readers checked out one of the main LinuxQuestions.org highlighted forum questions: "What programs would you like to see ported to Linux?" Hmmm... Can't think of one myself. I would just like to see GnuCash made a little easier is all. |
| jimf Jul 24, 2006 12:41 PM EDT |
> Sure, lots of requests appear to be newbies who ask for an "app" by brand and name, rather than by function or task to be accomplished, and thus are illustrating a familiarity problem, instead of an "app" shortage problem. It's pretty certain that some of those requests come from people who are only looking for a free (gratis) version of what they've been using; they're just here for the EULA, not to learn a different mouse movement. In most cases, I've found that noobs really don't know that an equivalent app exists, or how to find it. Yeah, they would prefer that it be keystroke for keystroke the same, but, they are more than thrilled to find that equivalent. Over the time I've been working with Linux, the quantity and quality of equivalent apps has increased geometrically. Most of the remaining gaps in equivalency are in very specialized areas. > "What programs would you like to see ported to Linux?" Well, If I had ZTree in Linux, I'd die happy :) ... I know, I know, what the heck is ZTree... |
| dcparris Jul 24, 2006 1:44 PM EDT |
In my Straw Poll asking if GNU/Linux had replaced Windows, some people who had not switched completely got suggestions for equivalent apps when people saw what was holding them back. Incidentally, that's still going on now. |
| grouch Jul 24, 2006 1:51 PM EDT |
jimf: >"Yeah, they would prefer that it be keystroke for keystroke the same, but, they are more than thrilled to find that equivalent." Sorry, I did not mean all newbies or even all newbies responding in that particular thread. I should have been more clear about the relatively small group I was talking about. It's fun to see that thrill you mention. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 24, 2006 2:14 PM EDT |
The biggest flaw with the article is it equates Linux with Microsoft, as though it were a single, centrally-controlled company. Which pretty much shoots down the entire article, because there is no valid basis for comparison. The second biggest flaw is it's factually wrong, as grouch already pointed out. The third flaw is it assumes that Linux "wants" to be a mainstream platform. It already is a lot of arenas, and the Linux desktop environments have been far superior to anything you can find for Windows for years. But the assumption that Uncle Fred and Aunt Edna "need" to use Linux, and that Linux "needs" to cater to them, when they can barely Web-surf with Windows, is just plain silly. The last thing the world needs is hordes of techno-phobes and techno-illiterates messing up Linux. Some folks simply shouldn't use computers. Or any tool more complex than a spork. Every single day some eager but not entirely clueful noob announces that all Linux needs for mainstream success is More Killer Apps, as though there were a magic software factory somewhere that simply needs to be turned on, or perhaps some grumpy Linux devs who simply need a bit of motivation. I just want to inject a bit of reality. There is no magic mommy or daddy who plucks this stuff out of thin air- if a vendor does not want to port to Linux, where are the missing apps going to come from? Here's a hint: http://lxer.com/module/newswire/lf/view/64720/ "The Value of Free Software" |
| boborooster Jul 24, 2006 2:52 PM EDT |
Hey there, new to this LXer blog.
Good points tuxchick2; as the saying goes "the one who has the greater inventive will invariably take the initiative". Someone referred me to an old piece of work by Eric Raymond entitled 'The Cathedral and the Bazaar' which almost seems to reinforce this saying for F/OSS and Linux. Hey, maybe CatB (as this piece is abbreviated to) can also help answer the question "where are the missing apps going to come from?" Anyway, guess that many of the users in the forum link flufferbeer brings are "not entirely clueful noobs". The presence of so many of these users can actually serve to strengthen the original author's point five that the specific marketing superiority of Microsoft may be what is really keeping back the noobs from finding and using those superior desktop environments and "equivalent apps" already existing in Linux. Hmmmmmm...... |
| grouch Jul 24, 2006 3:10 PM EDT |
What "missing apps"? I have yet to meet a coder who can implement foggy, hypothetical "apps" as code. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 24, 2006 3:20 PM EDT |
grouch, there are lots of them. Games and scientific apps are two categories that immediately come to mind. Publishing and image editing for print, and I don't want to hear "LaTex and Gimp", because those don't do the job. Other stuff which I can't think of now. Anyway there are definitely a lot of gaps; the practical questions are how to fill those gaps, and how to steer users to existing FOSS apps that do meet their needs. boborooster, you're right, marketing is a big part of it. But it's not all- it doesn't take much in the way of google-fu to find stuff. 100+ forum pages is pretty unwieldy, it would be most luvverly if some of the many folks who have time to post on that thread would extract and summarize the useful stuff. |
| grouch Jul 24, 2006 3:30 PM EDT |
Well, categories are a little more specific, but not enough to find or code. Here are some categorical links (lots more to be found elsewhere): http://edge-op.org/links1.html#software |
| boborooster Jul 24, 2006 4:30 PM EDT |
Moi again. On links, here are some relevant ones to the end part of this thread (up to now): - A Wikipedia on 'TheOpenCD' which is F/OSS for Windows, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TheOpenCD This looks like some good "non-missing apps" are on this CD for those noobies still on Microsoft Windows, n'est pas? :-) - The FSF/UNESCO categories of solely FSS, http://directory.fsf.org/ - The Wikipedia 'List of open source software [solely OSS] packages' listed by categories, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open_source_software_pa... Okay, okay, will stop now, soon to peut etre join another thread? --> le boborooster |
| jimf Jul 24, 2006 4:34 PM EDT |
Let's not forget http://linuxappfinder.com/ Don't even start to gripe until you've checked there. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 24, 2006 4:36 PM EDT |
boborooster, go nuts and join all the threads you can stand. :) |
| grouch Jul 24, 2006 5:29 PM EDT |
That's the trouble with all you penguin people: I started a nice, negative thread and you've turned it into real help for real problems! This leenuks thing will never take over the world until you learn to blame, intimidate and exploit the user. Focus! |
| dcparris Jul 24, 2006 11:00 PM EDT |
> Hey there, new to this LXer blog. Welcome aboard! Make yourself at home. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!