Really?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| bigg Nov 24, 2007 5:34 AM EDT |
FTA: "The separation between Mono and GNOME seems to be gradually fading." I have GNOME installed and not Mono. Does that mean I have only pseudo-GNOME? FTA: "Only 4 hours ago, two separate threads were ‘placed’ in several newsgroups (to be mirrored on the World Wide Web) which say that schestowitz.com and boycottnovell.com are attacking with Trojan horses. It’s a lie and a false accusation. It’s probably part of an attempt to have the sites blacklisted (never mind reputation) and these attempts are coming from anonymous posters on compromised (zombies) PCs around the world." Now I know he's ready for a straitjacket. Someone is taking over PCs and having them badmouth his site? The second comment on his post is critical, but pretty tame. It has been flagged "Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll". I can understand the reasoning. This poor guy is trying to have a site completely free of intelligence and a troll came along and posted something reasonable. |
| schestowitz Nov 24, 2007 10:48 AM EDT |
> Now I know he's ready for a straitjacket. Someone is taking over PCs and having them badmouth his site? That guy (look up 'flatfish' and 'gary stewart') has done this for almost a decade. Some say he's astroturfing. > This poor guy is trying to have a site completely free of intelligence and a troll came along and posted something reasonable. Follow the links on 'abusive'. He has harrassed other Web sites that block him for ad hominem attacks and aggressive remarks. |
| bigg Nov 24, 2007 11:18 AM EDT |
> He has harrassed other Web sites that block him for ad hominem attacks and aggressive remarks. Aggressive remarks, huh? Considering that you make more aggressive attacks against the Linux community than anyone else, including Microsoft, he should fit in with your site pretty well. |
| schestowitz Nov 24, 2007 1:24 PM EDT |
No, see the cited item. Godwin's Law was part of it, I think. |
| bigg Nov 24, 2007 1:38 PM EDT |
I don't think you're understanding my comment. I think your site is worse than worthless. It's very damaging to Linux. When you write garbage accusations about GNOME, which is a very good project, you make SCO proud. Leave these guys alone unless you have something worth saying. |
| tracyanne Nov 24, 2007 2:37 PM EDT |
Not only is this bloke's Beatup, soory, BoycottNovell garbage, it's purile Garbage. It's a collection of Strawmen and ... well pretty much every logical fallacy possible. It's conspiracy theory at it's glorious worst. It's crap, it's unbelievable crap, I'm personally ashamed to be in any way associated with the bloke that writes that blog. |
| schestowitz Nov 25, 2007 12:25 PM EDT |
Okay, so maybe FFII is conspiracy theorist as well? http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-28290/gnome-foundation-in-kah... "The Gnome foundation actively participated in the ECMA fast-tracking of Open XML as a sock puppet for Novell. " Wait a few months or years and we'll see who get the last laugh. I know my references very well. I write about things that I see. |
| hkwint Nov 26, 2007 10:24 AM EDT |
Quoting:"The Gnome foundation actively participated in the ECMA fast-tracking of Open XML as a sock puppet for Novell." OK, maybe a little explanation about ECMA can help: (Not) Gnome, nor KDE can vote in the ECMA process, since only 'approved' and 'ordinary' ECMA members can; and only for profit organizations can qualify to become approved ordinary members (IIRC it takes more than a two third majority of approval of the current ECMA to become an ECMA member). Therefore, Gnome and KDE don't have any influence in the ECMA process at all. In fact, Novell even isn't an ordinary member, they can talk but they can't vote. So when it comes to ECMA, Novell isn't that important (the ordinary members who _are_ allowed to vote are the usual suspects: Adobe, IBM, Philips, Microsoft, HP, Intel...) Probably, Novell didn't want to take the effort to send someone for a process in which they were not allowed to vote, and Gnome was probably happy they _could_ participate at all, without paying the rather expensive ECMA fees. So, what's better; Adobe, IBM, Philips, Microsoft e.a. without Novell deciding about ECMA standards (which normally just means rubberstamping), or adding Gnome in a Novell suit to the table to represent users that wouldn't have been represented at all otherwise? Probably ECMA376 would have been even worse without the participation of Gnome. All in all, Gnome moves in a pragmatic way; we cannot stop OOXML and therefore we better try to bend it, so open source can work with it at all. And as long as 'customers' ask for OOXML, then why wouldn't we offer it? At least, Gnome is not a company like Microsoft which doesn't listen to its customers but instead of listening to their customers goes its own way and does what's best for _them_ only, and not for their users. In this case, Gnome works about the same way Miguel de Icaza seems to work, but Miguel made a lot of stupid remarks about OOXML in my opinion. Anyway, they seem to meet a demand of FOSS customers. We can argue that's a bad thing, because by filling that demand they are helping Microsoft, but what would the alternative be? If Gnome wasn't to implement OOXML, those people would have a demand that's probably not met, and some of them therefore might not going to use some FOSS at all which they would _like_ to use in the first place. So, should Free Software makers ignore the OOXML demand and keep pointing out OOXML is inferior and people should use ODF (For people who don't understand all this - the types we elitist normally call 'newbies', it might sound the same like Microsoft pointing out XP is inferior and people should use Vista)? Or should we help them with their demands? Honestly, I don't know, but probably a hybrid approach would work to meet both the needs of freedom and some customers who are a little afraid of FOSS, but nonetheless are trying to get their feet wet. The last thing I wish for a new FOSS user was his feet being bit off by a piranha who's shouting he's a bonehead "because he's helping OOXML". |
| bigg Nov 26, 2007 11:17 AM EDT |
> All in all, Gnome moves in a pragmatic way; we cannot stop OOXML and therefore we better try to bend it, so open source can work with it at all. You are right, of course, but what would you do if you ran a website that existed for the sole purpose of putting its nose in the air and determining who is pure and who is not pure? Rational explanations that start out with the assumption that free software projects are trying to do good things don't give boycottnovell.com any material. > Miguel made a lot of stupid remarks about OOXML in my opinion I agree that his famous statement on OOXML was very stupid indeed, but the project itself is much bigger than someone who doesn't even play an important role in it anymore. As to whether the GNOME foundation would prefer to work with OOXML or ODF, you'd have to be incredibly ignorant to think they'd choose OOXML. > So, should Free Software makers ignore the OOXML demand and keep pointing out OOXML is inferior and people should use ODF I will occasionally get required files in MS Office format. If the files don't open in Linux, I have to use Windows. Period. Just try moving a business to Linux sometime and not have the capability to read Office files. Telling your customers that truly open formats are better, so they need to convert all files to an acceptable format first, will put you out of business in a hurry. Maybe I just need to be willing to sacrifice my job in the name of supporting open formats. So what if my kid doesn't have shoes, at least I didn't take part in a conspiracy to lock documents into Microsoft's formats. |
| jdixon Nov 26, 2007 11:29 AM EDT |
> Just try moving a business to Linux sometime and not have the capability to read Office files. Run a Citrix server (or better yet, Crossover Server) and let the people who still need Microsoft Office run it from there. 80% or more of your people won't need it, and the 20% who do will only need it 20% of the time. The savings in licensing costs alone will probably pay for the server. |
| Abe Nov 26, 2007 12:44 PM EDT |
Quoting:All in all, Gnome moves in a pragmatic way; we cannot stop OOXML and therefore we better try to bend it, so open source can work with it at all.Let's try not to be that naive. The issue here is not supporting but rather giving credibility to OOXML. Are these guys serious about getting MS to correct the bad things in OOXML that they need corrected? Dream on, MS will never do such a thing because OOXML was intentionally and purposely designed to be complicated and complex. MS has no plans to create true open XML. All their intentions are geared towards and focused on giving an old binary proprietary format the perception of becoming open by adding XML ot it for enterprises and government agencies to keep using MS Office. We should be working on exposing MS intentions not giving their new format credibility. OOXML is even worse than the current binary MS Office format because of all the added complexities and patents it is covered under. These guys are either wasting their time or have ulterior motives. While it is true that some companies can't carry their business without MS Office, it is also true that there are many entities that are, can, and will use ODF instead. Those who can't now should force MS to eventually adopt or create a converter for ODF. If they have no desire, that is their issue and will eventually be forced to use ODF if they want to stay in business with those entities who use ODF. ODF is unavoidable and inevitable simply because it is the right thing and sensible approach for business and governments in the long run. Instead of trying to bend MS, we should keep trying to break it for once and all, even if it is going to take longer time and much more effort. I think it is the sensible thing to do and well worth it. GNOME shouldn't have to worry about OOXML at all. I don't see why they need to worry about it? Just adopt ODF like KDE is doing and move on. Gnumeric is a good application, but without a word processor and a presentation application to complement it, I don't see it being adopted or potentially accepted as an important application in the enterprise and government. OpenOffice and KOffice by far have much better chance of being adopted in large entities. |
| jdixon Nov 26, 2007 1:00 PM EDT |
> GNOME shouldn't have to worry about OOXML at all. Gnome doesn't. Novell does. |
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!