It comes back down to the same old question:
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 9:00 AM EDT |
The argument here is the same as it's been for years: Do we want Linux to be an OS that could run anybody's desktop, or do we want it reserved for servers and the "chosen few" desktops of those blessed souls smart enough to "get it"? If multimedia is something users want to do -- including their iPods, then users can't use Linux desktops if Linux can't do that. Either choice is legitimate, but we should be honest. If we don't care about most users, we should just say so. Makes a lot of other problems simpler, too. Drivers? Not a big deal, because we only cater to those people smart enough to select Linux-compatible hardware. [name the application]? Hey!! Go use Windows. Linux isn't for you. |
| jimf Aug 18, 2006 9:26 AM EDT |
I wish it were that simple dino. What we shouldn't be doing, is jumping for the first proprietary solution ever time we want to add to the user base. Lately you seem to be doing that a lot. |
| jdixon Aug 18, 2006 9:29 AM EDT |
Well, as I noted earlier in another thread, if users want their IPOD's and ITunes to work with Linux, they should tell Apple. The IPOD is closed hardware and ITunes is closed software. The responsibility for making them work with Linux belongs to Apple, and if enough users complain, it will happen. |
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 9:31 AM EDT |
It is that simple, jimf. Absolutely that simple. Notice that I said nothing whatsoever about free or proprietary. Not a word. Now -- Here's the rub: If we don't care about most computer users, life gets easier, but might not get better. We don't have to make any compromises or hard choices. It's "my way or the highway" all the way. If we do care about most computer users, we have to find some way to meet their needs, or they can't use Linux. And, BTW, saying "you don't need to do that" is not a way to win friends, influence people, and get more Linux users. In fact, quite the opposite. It's mighty damned hard to convince the world outside the technical community that Linux is a technical heavyweight when you're constantly having to say "Uh...you can't do that with Linux." |
| jdixon Aug 18, 2006 9:33 AM EDT |
Dino: > Do we want Linux to be an OS that could run anybody's desktop...? In the more general sense, I think the answer to that question is yes, if we can do so without compromising the principles upon which Linux is based. If doing so requires compromising those principles, then the answer is no. |
| jimf Aug 18, 2006 9:35 AM EDT |
Dino: What jdixion said... |
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 9:43 AM EDT |
And where is the line? |
| jimf Aug 18, 2006 9:47 AM EDT |
Heck, I'm finished posting for the day... |
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 9:48 AM EDT |
coward. ;0) |
| jdixon Aug 18, 2006 10:17 AM EDT |
Dino: > And where is the line? Each developer decides that for him/herself. That's the way an open system like this works. But you know that. > coward. I think you probably should put a smily after that, otherwise the intent can be misconstrued. :) |
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 10:35 AM EDT |
jd - Smiley applied. |
| jimf Aug 18, 2006 10:40 AM EDT |
Heck, I've been around here long enough to know that 'misconstrued' is dino's middle name :) |
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 10:54 AM EDT |
jimf -- That's Mr. construed to you! |
| jimf Aug 18, 2006 11:53 AM EDT |
I stand corrected... |
| SFN Aug 18, 2006 11:53 AM EDT |
Quoting:If we don't care about most users, we should just say so. Um, yeah. I don't care about most users. |
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 12:42 PM EDT |
>Um, yeah. I don't care about most users. That's a start. |
| jimf Aug 18, 2006 12:59 PM EDT |
> Um, yeah. I don't care about most users. I support users in Debian related Distros, so obviously I do care, however, I have to limit that. I have no sympathy for those people who 'say' they want Linux, then feel that they are entitled, without effort on their part. Or those who refuse to learn anything new. They are users in only the basest sense, and Linux is far better off without them. The same applies to those who aren't at least interested in learning about the GPL and FOSS. Just packing the room with bodies doesn't enrich Linux. |
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 1:32 PM EDT |
jimf - Sounds like you don't care about most users, either. That's ok...there is no need to care. Lots of people think Linux shouldn't serve the "I just want to use my computer to do the things I need/want to do" crowd. It makes it easier to frame the issue. Pains me, though. I love Linux. I love free software. I think all software should be free. At the same time, I don't want to cough up for a Mac in order to complete my computing experience. |
| jimf Aug 18, 2006 3:26 PM EDT |
Quoting:I love Linux. I love free software. I think all software should be free. I agree completely, but, let's look at what 'free' software is. Free software, In this case Linux, was created by a bunch of people who cared enough to contribute, either directly by coding, or, by contributing whatever other talents they had, to the community. It isn't expected that everyone be a coder, or that the contribution has to be earthshaking, but we all 'should' give something back. Now, that isn't stated in the GPL, or written in stone anywhere, but we all know that it's there, and it's the element that ties us together and makes Linux a community like no other. Every time we bring in a bunch of users who have no regard for this tradition we dilute the spirit of that community, and that is inexcusable... And, very sad. Quoting:I don't want to cough up for a Mac in order to complete my computing experience. In the end, I don't think you'll have to dino. Look at the track record. I've seen Linux supply pretty much what is needed to get the job done. It may take them a little time to accomplish that, and, I'm never sure 'how' they do it, but, it will happen. :D |
| perseis Aug 18, 2006 3:36 PM EDT |
"If we don't care about most computer users, life gets easier, but might not get better. We don't have to make any compromises or hard choices. It's "my way or the highway" all the way. Hummm...I bet if many Linux Advocates had an idea how prevelant this attitude is, they would not have given chunks of their life trying to "spread the word." I do see it now that I am paying attention. Community or idividual A tells the thirsting masses there is an oasis and to follow them to drink. Community or individual B stands at the waters edge, relieving themselves in the pool as the ones that thirst approach. "It is MY pool and I will taint it if I wish." What were the words to Cher's song? "If I could turn back time.? |
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 4:14 PM EDT |
perseis - Personally, I never took Linus's goal of "world domination" as a joke. I believe in law, freedom, and representative government even for those poor slackers who don't bother to vote. I believe that a free society is the best society and that free societies don't overtly designate a segment of their citizenry as "citizens, second class" or some such thing. I believe that free software is good for everyone, even those who are not able to understand why. I don't much understand open heart surgery and certainly would not appreciate the technique of a surgeon who saved my life by performing a delicate procedure on me. I would, however, appreciate the result -- life vs. death. Lots of people find it very hard to understand what software freedom is all about. We talk a lot about source code, something most people never see and wouldn't comprehend if they did. That's ok. They're still better off with free software. I'd like them to understand that, but I don't require it. |
| perseis Aug 18, 2006 4:36 PM EDT |
"Lots of people find it very hard to understand what software freedom is all about." You may freely count me among that demographic. My husband has drilled "free as in beer" and "free as in freedom" into my head so often I am thinking of setting up a toll booth in front of the resulting cavity. As a member of the recently enlightened, I can honestly report that this issue isn't one of burning importance to most people. Then again, most people act as cattle and form feeding lines behind the most recent Microsoft display at Circuit City. I was usually near the front of that line most times. My point was that I see a terrible rift in the Linux Community. And Yes Jessica, there IS a Linux Community, thank you. I received an email in the lobby4linux gmail account a short time ago and it was someone who developed programs for Red Hat. This person was addressing my husband concerning a recent blog he had written and the gist of it was "if you don't produce code, STFU." (his rude acronym, not mine). I was later to see that my husband responded in a simple yet profound way. "OK Einstein, Let's put your theory to work. You are now Bach. Write your brilliant music, but know that it will rot on the parchment on which you record it. No orchestra will ever reproduce it, no musician will ever admire it." That struck home with me, and I hope with the software writer. There are many gears to this machine, and not just the biggest one makes the bell ring. It was only after reading that exchange that I realized that the Linux Community isn't one happy family like I thought it was. It can get down right mean in here. That disturbs me more than I want it to. |
| dinotrac Aug 18, 2006 4:45 PM EDT |
>That disturbs me more than I want it to. Don't let it. I've always thought that The Simpson's was the perfect family show, and not in spite of the family's severely dysfunctional state. You see, all families are dysfunctional. We may had it, may deny it, but it's true. Human beings who hold on to their passions and their soul will sometimes rub at the edges. The value of a family, or of a community, does not show up when everybody is smiling and playing party games. It comes to bear when the going is tough and seeing eye to eye seems impossible. Families can yell, they can harumph, they can do stupid things, but, if, in the end, they are there for each other, they are good. In the Linux community, we have lots of harumphing. Lots of smart people, lots of spouting off. It's been that way all along, and yet Linux is more than still around, it's stronger than ever. Relax, shake your head at foolishness, but don't worry too much. The community is stronger than the people who make it up. |
| perseis Aug 18, 2006 6:27 PM EDT |
Helios told me one time that there is more collective wisdom on one LXer discussion page than can be found in any given corporate board room at any given time. Telling him he's right only encourages him, so we'll keep that little nod of agreement between us. |
| jimf Aug 18, 2006 6:43 PM EDT |
> there is more collective wisdom on one LXer discussion page than can be found in any given corporate board room at any given time. What a put down... I can tell that you've never been in a corporate board room :D. That's the equivelent of 'better than nothing'. |
| Libervis Aug 18, 2006 8:23 PM EDT |
Do I care about most users? Yes. Do I want everyone to use Free Software? Yes. Do I want everyone to use GNU/Linux? Not necessarily. They can use *BSDs, future Haiku OS or even OpenSolaris if they wish. It's not about the OS, it's about freedom. As long as they have that when using software it's great and I wish it for everyone in the world. When you put it that way, then the choice is not set between GNU/Linux and Windows or OSX, but between Free Software and nonfree software. If you manage to switch 90% of all computer users to GNU/Linux, you didn't necessarily switch 90% of all users to Free Software. If you compromised with nonfree software even when there was an alternative possibility (which includes even creating the alternative if it's missing) you didn't switch 90% users to Free Software, you merely switched alot of them to a half-free OS (GNU/Linux with proprietary software on top which didn't have to be there). So again, it's not about the OS. It's about Free Software. If you look at it that way you wont compromise with nonfree software just to bring more users to an OS. You will try your best to support creating Free Software applications and programs that are still missing rather than just slapping the next ported proprietary solution onto an OS and inviting everyone over. What about users who refuse to understand freedom in Free Software? Well, they are not the reason for you to offer them proprietary software. They'll understand, eventually, when in the Free World you helped create, Free Software principles become a norm they, as the sheep they are, take by default. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 18, 2006 11:02 PM EDT |
> there is more collective wisdom on one LXer discussion page than can be found in any given corporate board room at any given time. Not a suprise. The collevtive wisdom in your average corporate board room is alarmingly low, especially when IT is involved. In my entire life I have only met one suit who "gets" IT. I am working for him now. Sadly he's low on the suit-scale so his hands are often tied by those above him, but he knows how to play the political management game and, more importantly, he knows how to shield the geeks below from the corporate politics above him. If I had anyone else ablove me I would have jumped ship already. |
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!