stuck in a loop!
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tuxchick Aug 15, 2009 8:37 PM EDT |
I think they poached Eliza too. |
| tracyanne Aug 15, 2009 9:09 PM EDT |
The thing that really annoys me about TomTom, is that they use Linux and Free Software, which is fine, in and of itself, but they give nothing back, not even something as little as a thing that would enable Linux users to become their customers. It's even worse when you consider the fact that TomTom Home is actually built on top of Mozilla's XULRunner, which is cross platform, which means creating a Linux client would be quite easy. |
| kt Aug 15, 2009 9:18 PM EDT |
Tracy, perhaps I can ease you pain. Please follow the instructions I provided for you below. 1) Install Wine (sudo apt-get install wine) 2) Download TomTom Home installation exe (http://www.tomtom.com/services/service.php?id=16&tab=87)and place it in your home directory. 3) Download and unzip the following file into your home directory: http://www.sweetpotatosoftware.com/files/microsoft.vc80.crt.... 4) Run command "wine /home/tracy/TomTomHOME2winlatest.exe" 5) Ignore a bunch of "Runtime Error!" messages -- just keep clicking "OK". 6) Go to "Applications->Wine->Programs->TomTom->TomTom HOME 2" I ran this TomTom HOME on Ubuntu 9.04. It started OK. The interface looks clean and usable. What happens after that I just don't know -- I don't have a TomTom. Please use the linked DLLs at your own risk -- I don't know their origin. Please let me know if you can get your stuff working. Thanks PS: I also do not approve of TomTom's Linux Desktop neglect. |
| caitlyn Aug 15, 2009 9:22 PM EDT |
It shouldn't need WINE. It should run natively under Linux. If it runs on Linux having to run a Windows program, however it is done, is stupid. |
| kt Aug 15, 2009 9:26 PM EDT |
"however it is done, is stupid" Well, forgive me my help. |
| tracyanne Aug 15, 2009 10:11 PM EDT |
@kt While i could, probably, get TomTom Home working on my personal rig, I have other people to think about, as well, and if the DLLs are potentially dodgy then I don't want anything to do with them, WINE puts a big enough security hole in Linux as it is, and I'm not about to trust dodgy DLLs to that mix. But kt, part of my reason for buying th TomTom, so I could get to know it, was because I saw a potential for sales, by linking my (Feral Penguin's) computers with TomTom, or visa versa. My initial thought was to recommend TomTom as such devices are very popular in the same market segment I'm trying to push my Linux computers into, and it occured to me that there might be a synergy there..... no such luck it appears, and I thought that I might be able to become a TomTom reseller........ given their attitude, I see no point. So kt even if I can manage to get TomTom Home working on my personal machine and nicely connecting to the TomTom device, it's rather pointless, as I can't go to my customers and say well there's this possibly dodgy work around....... especially when I'm aiming at people who aren't going to want to put that much effort into getting foreign software working on their computer. The TomTom Home client needs to support Linux, and there really is no good reason, that I can see, for it not doing so, it like pretty much everything else on the TomTom devices is built on Linux and Free Open Source software, and especially, in the case of the TomTom Home application Free Open Source Cross platform Software. The only thing stopping it is a willingness on the part of TomTom to officially recognise their debt to the Linux and Free Software Community. It's not even an onerous debt. The sad thing here is that the TomTom devices are probably among the best of their type. My contacts at Dick Smith Electronics tell me that the TomTom is the one they have the least trouble with, the least returns, and the most satisfied customers. But given TomToms reluctance to recognise, let alone support Linux, I can't recommend TomTom products to anyone. |
| tracyanne Aug 15, 2009 10:29 PM EDT |
@kt, I've actually already tried running TomTom Home under WINE, it doesn't communicate with the device. I've also tried it on Windows running on a VM with full USB pass through, that doesn't work either., and naturally I can't expect anyone I sell machines to to necessarily have Windows running of a VM. With luck, for them, they might have purchased a Linux machine from me as a second computer. No, no matter how you slice it, TomTom should be supplying a Linux client. |
| tuxchick Aug 15, 2009 11:09 PM EDT |
Quoting: TomTom should be supplying a Linux client. I agree. It's just more exploitation. Back when Microsoft first filed suit against TomTom everyone was going "Yay, TomTom is our friend and will fight the nasty Borg!" Er well no, that was naive to say the least. They caved in and settled within a month, details of settlement all nice and secret, and hiding any possible GPL violations related to patents. As Jeremy Allison explained: http://opendotdotdot.blogspot.com/2009/02/has-microsofts-pat... Quoting: If Tom Tom or any other company cross licenses patents then by section 7 of GPLv2 (for the Linux kernel) they lose the rights to redistribute the kernel *at all*... I'd say MS has TomTom by the shorts, and we're never going to see a native Linux client. *edit* Because regulators are obsessed with Web browsers. This obvious collusion and abuse of monopoly powers over hardware vendors and retailers is apparently insignificant in the face of the all-important browser choice. sigh.... |
| kt Aug 16, 2009 12:16 AM EDT |
Tracy said: "While i could, probably, get TomTom Home working on my personal rig, " That was the only purpose of my original post -- to save your personal TomTom without using mindovs -- from your e-mails to TomTom I figured you like it too much, so I decided to help ;). Of course, recommending usage of Wine to customers (even if all works well) as a part of your product/service is not a very good approach. So, I will stop my attempts at TomTom Home on Wine here. As I already mentioned, I do not approve of TomTom's neglect of Linux Desktop. However, I will stop short of calling them "disgusting leaches", since I have no information about their actual contribution to the FOSS community. Even if I had such information, I would possibly be hesitant to judge, because I'm not sure what kind of contribution to FOSS one has to make not to be classified as a "disgusting leach". It is possible that their use of Linux in the devices might be considered by some as a contribution -- that's one company less possibly using MS -- that's less money going to war against Linux. Please forgive my opinion. |
| tuxchick Aug 16, 2009 1:03 AM EDT |
Kt, you missed the point of TA's article, by quite a bit actually. Maybe read it again? |
| kt Aug 16, 2009 1:11 AM EDT |
TC said: "Kt, you missed the point of TA's article, by quite a bit actually. Maybe read it again? " Would you be so kind explaining exactly what I missed? |
| tracyanne Aug 16, 2009 1:33 AM EDT |
Quoting:However, I will stop short of calling them "disgusting leaches", since I have no information about their actual contribution to the FOSS community. In short kt, they don't. They have made no contribution to anything, they return the absolute minimum they must according to the licenses, they use, which are the GPL and the MPL, all versions of their Home product are built on XULRunner. A tool Mozilla developed specifically for cross platform desktop applications. Based on their responses, and their apparent unwillingness to publicly acknowledge their debt to Linux and Free Software, or even acknowedge that their devices are built on such Free Software, and the fact that the pages containing information about the GPL and the MPL are so well hidden, I draw the conclusion, that even what they do would be a good deal less, if they could get away with it. |
| yvesvanbelle Aug 16, 2009 4:47 AM EDT |
Hello kt, If TomTom Home would work with Wine I would be very happy. But here is the problem. It installs and the program starts, but there is no communication with the TomTom device. So this solution is worthless. What bothers me is that TomTom uses GNU/Linux and runs to the Linux foundation when Microsoft attacks them, but gives nothing back. It can't be hard to port the Mac OS X client to GNU/Linux because about 98% of the code is XUL and javascript. So the only reason I can see is they have no respect for the GNU community and only use the GNU software for there own profit without giving back, and this is not the GNU way. |
| bigg Aug 16, 2009 7:08 AM EDT |
They're as greasy as they come. The guys that run TomTom are not much better than the guys that steal money out of the collection basket at church. Some people think it's good that TomTom uses Linux. They are an enemy of Linux because they do their best to lock folks into Windows. I've got a Nextar GPS and AFAICT there are no issues related to using it with Linux, even though it appears to run Windows CE. Just pop the SD card into my Linux box to add MP3 files or pictures. Updates, you put the new SD card into it. I have no experience with TomTom (they're evil, after all), so I can't compare it, but am very happy with Nextar. $99 at Best Buy. |
| mjeffer Aug 16, 2009 9:33 AM EDT |
When will people learn that a hardware company that uses Linux in their products is not the same as a FOSS company? |
| hkwint Aug 16, 2009 11:01 AM EDT |
Quoting:When will people learn that a hardware company that uses Linux in their products is not the same as a FOSS company? No chance here on LXer. I understand people are frustrated, and right so in my opinion. I'm frustrated with all kind of peripherals that don't support Linux also. However, that's no reason to lose reality out of sight and make outrageous claims. Quoting:Because regulators are obsessed with Web browsers. This obvious collusion and abuse of monopoly powers over hardware vendors and retailers is apparently insignificant in the face of the all-important browser choice. sigh.... I disagree, at least when it comes to the EU-regulators. Please contact these regulators and you will find out you're wrong. They're actually quite aware of the behaviour of Microsoft - even outside media players and browser 'obsession'. In fact, that's not an obsession, but the only thing which can easily be proven. If this TomTom 'collusion and abuse of monopoly' is so obvious to break the law, I'd say why not substantiate your claims and elaborate on how this breaches the law. I'd be happy to send the complaints - if accompanied by actual _proof_ of how the behaviour is a violation of EU antitrust law - to the right persons. In fact, those EU regulators would be very happy to receive documents proving Microsoft is violating anti-trust law outside the browser market. Fact is, what seems obvious to you and me (and everyone else) is hard to proof in courts such as the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg. If it cannot be proven there, well, then you don't have a case. I agree that's not the way it ought to be, 'obvious cases' should be trivial to be 'proven' in court, but that's just not the reality is. And of course 400M European citizens are shouting much money is wasted in Bruxelles, meaning no extra personnel in the office that works on these cases (rather they like to do the 'same work with less persons', however futile such an attempt may be). Quoting:The guys that run TomTom are not much better than the guys that steal money out of the collection basket at church. I really hope your kidding, because that's just bollocks. Stealing money out of the collection basket at church is illegal, using free software to your benefit without giving anything back isn't. Moreover, the freedom to 'leech' is one of the freedoms envisioned when the GPL was written - at least as far as I'm aware. |
| tuxchick Aug 16, 2009 11:32 AM EDT |
Kt, TA's article is clear and easy to understand. It is not about kludging the TomTom Windows client into working on Linux. Hans, get real. It's the regulatory agencies who have the resources and authority to investigate and collect evidence. They're the business cops, not us. What do you think we can do, break into offices and steal documents? Yeah, that's a great idea, I'll start tonight. You can be the getaway driver. I agree with biggs and TA that companies like TomTom who profit from using Linux but don't support Linux users is exploitation. Want more examples of greasy behavior? The Google bazillionaires built their fortunes on Linux, but send Linux users to the end of the line every time. Amazon's Kindle is Linux-fueled Big Brother on closed hardware, and Amazon itself runs on Linux. Tivo is still closed hardware. PalmPre is built on Linux but they never ever say the "L" word, calling it WebOS, and it's just a big ugly spyware machine. And on and on...there are many such examples. There is a clear line between an end user using Linux and having limited resources to give back, and a company profiting from Linux and taking a dump on the community and Linux users. mjeffer, that's a good point. I don't join in the cheerleading when some company claims to be the friend of the penguin until I see an actual reason for it. |
| hkwint Aug 16, 2009 12:02 PM EDT |
Quoting:It's the regulatory agencies who have the resources and authority Well, that's what I tried to explain: They don't have the resources. And before they can 'break into offices' (they do that quite a lot indeed), they need at least some trustworthy indications on how MS or any other company is violating the law. Because 'breaking into offices' takes quite a lot of resources and they _don't have_ that resources, they're asking for the 'corporate community' to deliver the evidence. That's what Sun, Winamp, AMD and Opera did, and lots of others (outside the IT-field). Heck, they even are not punished if they violated law if they snitch on others. But to assume that they have the resources is just plain _wrong_. When there are no corporate entities willing to file complains then as a citizen most of the times you're screwed. Also, I think you're underestimating the difficulties of proving how some entity violates the competition law. Please read the competition law (art 82/83), it's quite general and really complex to 'prove' how some entity violates it. As you'll probably know ADUC made a formal complaint about the OEM/distributor channel/Microsoft deals, but until now there's not much the EC could do about it, given the lack of actual evidence and resources. What I'm protesting against is your implicit assertion the regulators don't do anything about these abuses because a 'lack of interest / fixation on the browser market', that would be dishonest. |
| viator Aug 16, 2009 12:05 PM EDT |
Maybe the community could circumvent tomtom and create our own linux version of tomtom home? If it is indeed based on xulrunner cleanroom reverse engineering it might not be very difficult. If someone starts a bounty for a project like this i will gladly contribute. |
| kt Aug 16, 2009 1:38 PM EDT |
TC said: "Kt, TA's article is clear and easy to understand. " Yes it is easy to understand. And I got everything that was said. However, I'm entitled to my opinion also. Correct? |
| azerthoth Aug 16, 2009 3:52 PM EDT |
Everyone is entitled to opinions, even when wrong. *note, unless I agree, I withhold the right to tell everyone else when they are wrong* |
| tracyanne Aug 16, 2009 5:08 PM EDT |
Quoting:Maybe the community could circumvent tomtom and create our own linux version of tomtom home? All TomTom need do is ask, and I'm sure such a client would be built even more quickly, and at no monetary cost to TomTom, but that would require that they share something with the community, and even mean that they officially recognise the community, and the use they already make of that community, and I'm pretty sure the only interaction they want with Linux and Free software is one way. |
| tracyanne Aug 16, 2009 5:13 PM EDT |
@mjeffer
Quoting:When will people learn that a hardware company that uses Linux...... One can only hope. @kt Quoting:...I'm entitled to my opinion also. Correct? you are. |
| jdixon Aug 16, 2009 5:26 PM EDT |
> However, I'm entitled to my opinion also. Correct? You're both entitled to your opinion, and barring violations of the TOS, entitled to voice it. LXer is a good place that way. That doesn't necessarily mean anyone else will agree, of course; even if you're correct. |
| bigg Aug 16, 2009 7:47 PM EDT |
> I really hope your kidding, because that's just bollocks. Stealing money out of the collection basket at church is illegal, using free software to your benefit without giving anything back isn't. Definitely not kidding. For me, the distinction between legal and illegal is not relevant for defining greasiness. Stealing out of the collection basket is not always illegal, depending on where you go to church, unless of course you define stealing as the law defines it. I chose that example specifically because in some churches individuals are allowed to take from the collection basket if they have a need to do so. Someone taking from the collection basket without actually having a need is doing what TomTom is doing. I should also add that to me the most important aspect of software freedom is that it can break down the digital divide. I've seen kids who, solely because of the ovarian lottery, don't have access to computers. In our current world, those kids are at a significant disadvantage. To some extent I was in the same situation, but computers are much more important in today's world than they were thirty years ago, and I had access to the computer labs at a US public university when I reached college age. Others don't have that opportunity and many end up doing manual labor at a survival wage. So that's a long-winded answer of why I equate the two. Free software is provided for a specific purpose, the same as a church donation, and misuse of free software has far larger implications than just taking a few dollars out of a collection basket. For a company to profit from free software and then turn around and do its best to lock the world into proprietary is an evil action IMO. It's not the failure to give back, it's the deliberate actions to make free software a lesser product that is problematic. There are many bad actions that you can take with free software that do not conflict with the GPL. They are still wrong. |
| tuxchick Aug 16, 2009 8:26 PM EDT |
Hans, the EU has done some amazing work re: Microsoft, such as getting them to publicly document SMB/CIFS. Which they did in classic MS fashion, releasing a giant wad of incomplete garbled crud, and charging $10,000 for it. But it was enough for the Samba team and other groups to use and build on, and now they have a full-time team working with Microsoft to clean it up.
http://news.samba.org/developers/Samba_Team_Blog_1/
Quoting: we now have a Samba Team member working at Microsoft ! Congratulations to Chris Hertel, who was offered an opportunity to work directly with Microsoft to create a new set of SMB/CIFS protocol documentation. This will be published as part of the MCPP/WSPP set and made freely available from Microsoft's website. More than any other regulatory agency, the EU have persisted in going after MS. Whether browsers are a silly sideshow or not, the EU deserves much credit for what they have done. |
| caitlyn Aug 17, 2009 12:46 AM EDT |
What tc said... (It's late, so don't expect long, articulate opinions from me right now.) |
| hkwint Aug 17, 2009 3:48 AM EDT |
Quoting:it's the deliberate actions to make free software a lesser product While I'm OK with your reaction (stealing out of the basket is not allowed in this region though), I fail to see how Tomtom deliberately makes free software a lesser product? Quoting:such as getting them to publicly document SMB/CIFS Indeed, and they (the EC) and we (the citizens) were happy Sun gone through great lengths to specify how Microsoft violated the anti-trust law. That included legal beagles from Sun working on this case. The problem is, with other abuses, there's not always a company willing to pay some fine lawyers to file a nice complaint. So if no 'competitor' suffers a disadvantage (if all PND-makers only support Windows) there's no competitor suffering, only the consumer. That's the problem here (and in the OEM-case): Citizens suffer from a disadvantage because of a lack of competitors, but because there are no competitors, there is no company to file a complaint. It's a gap not 'solved' by competition law, sadly: The competition law protects 'competitors' as in "competing companies", but it's not there to protect the consumer. So I'm not sure it's the right instrument to fight any 'possible' abuse (unless you live in Russia, it was absolutely no problem over there it seems; a long list of OEM's were charged). |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 17, 2009 6:40 AM EDT |
I have to side with Hans here. It's a shame that there's no Linux client for TomTom Home, but that does not make them leeches. What TomTom is doing is explicitly allowed by the licenses of the software that they use and they comply with the licenses. They also contribute things back upstream. For example, grep the kernel commit logs for "tomtom" and you will see quite a few commits (separate kernel commit logs can be found at http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/kernel_...). They do the same for XULRunner. I think we should buy TomTom and we should pester their help desks for Linux support. According to one TomTom Home developer, they are planning a Linux client but it may be some time off (http://adblockplus.org/blog/using-xulrunner-platform). I think TomTom is our best bet to get a fully working and supported Personal Navigation Device that works natively on a Linux desktop. |
| tracyanne Aug 17, 2009 7:22 AM EDT |
No Sander they are leaches. If you read their responses, it's pretty clear they are not at all interested. The "appollogies" are obvious marketing speak, and to top it off, their advice is that need to use a Windows or Mac computer, to do that I would need to go out and buy a new computer with one or the other operating system, that makes the TomTom One damned expensive. They don't care about Linux, what they do is no more than is what is required by the licenses they use, and they couldn't care less that this customer can't use their device.... after all they've got their money. The fact that some TomTom developer has some private project running is irrelevant, the TomTom management don't support Linux. They could have a TomTom Home client quite easily by going to the community, indeed given that the TomTom Home client is built on XULRunner and other cross platform libraries, they could build a TomTom Home client quite easily, anyway. The only real interest they have in Linux and free Software is as a resource that can be mined cheaply. In fact the fact is they clearly had no interest in being part of the community until they were threatened threatened by Microsoft. Their new found love of the community is hypocritical at best. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 17, 2009 8:06 AM EDT |
Quoting:If you read their responses, it's pretty clear they are not at all interested. You were talking to the Customer Care Team. That's just support staff. They follow the script. To determine if they are interested or not you'd have to speak to management and/or engineering directly. Perhaps you could persuade them for an LXer Interview? :-) Quoting:what they do is no more than is what is required by the licenses they use Demonstratibely not true. See the logs that I linked to. They actively contribute back to the Linux kernel and XULRunner communities, something that they don't have to do according to the license. They could be doing a lot more of course. Linux desktop isn't helped at all by their current level of support. But Linux embedded and Mozilla are profiting from their work. Calling a company leeches and calling for a boycott because they don't contribute back to the maximum extent possible is over the top IMHO. |
| bigg Aug 17, 2009 8:07 AM EDT |
> I fail to see how Tomtom deliberately makes free software a lesser product? Because you can do some things with a proprietary OS that you can't do with Linux. For someone wanting to use a TomTom, the list of acceptable OSes includes none that are free. They could argue that it is too costly to support the small number of Linux users (and pretend that the same is not true for the Mac) but that is nonsense. FOSS developers will gladly do all of the work. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 17, 2009 8:21 AM EDT |
@bigg, that doesn't lessen free software. It merely leaves it at it's status quo while the proprietary world gains. |
| tracyanne Aug 17, 2009 8:27 AM EDT |
Quoting:You were talking to the Customer Care Team. That's just support staff. They follow the script. The Script is decided by the management, not the people who follow it. The script is loaded with marketing speak, decided on by the management types you suggest I speak to, clearly they don't give a toss about Linux, or Linux users. So they contribute back to the kernel. They make changes that are necessary to the viability of their devices. they sell those devices, the license requires that they contribute that code back. They do nothing more than is necessary. As for the XULRunner stuff, I followed you link and saw a private project by someone who is a TomTom developer, in actuallity most of the blog was about the Windows client. Tom Tom are clearly not supportive of any Linux client. Quoting:Calling a company leeches and calling for a boycott because they don't contribute back to the maximum extent possible is over the top IMHO. I'm not asking that they contribute to the maximum extent. In fact I'm only asking that they contribute to a very very small extent, and even then the contribution I'm asking for is of much greater value to them than to the community. The only value the community gets out of if is the ability to use a TomTom device after buying it. It's not even as if I'm expecting them to do any more than they currently do for any other operating system. I'm calling them leaches because they give back nothing than is required of them, and won't even provide a minimum level of support for their devices on Linux desktops. I'm calling them leaches because they seem to think it;'s usefule to tell a customer they need to use a Windows or Mac operating system, when clearly that customer would have to purchase that OS specifically to run the TomTom device. Their correspondence with me was full of self serving marketing speak, things like Quoting:We would like to thank you for your feedback regarding TomTom Home compatibility. which is a formula they used several times is not about giving a damn about the customer, or the customer's issues, it's about fobbing the customer off, and hoping the customer will go away and stop whining. Personally I think the best way to deal with their attitude is to dissuade as many people as possible from buying their products. It doesn't matter in terms of the Linux Desktop, TomTom won't support it, even though they mine Linux and Free Software, and the others have no intention of doing so either. But the other don't Use Free software either, while give little to nothing back. |
| bigg Aug 17, 2009 9:24 AM EDT |
> @bigg, that doesn't lessen free software. It merely leaves it at it's status quo while the proprietary world gains. The quality of free software is determined by the ability to do the things that users want to do. In a world with GPS systems that don't play well with Linux, Linux is hurt. Every TomTom sold is another user who cannot switch to Linux without cost - you either don't update your TomTom, or you have to boot into Windows, assuming you set up the dual boot system correctly. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 17, 2009 12:02 PM EDT |
Quoting:The Script is decided by the management, not the people who follow it. The script is also based on existing devices and software. It is designed to provide technical support. If you want to know what TomTom is planning for the future you need to ask management directly. Quoting:They do nothing more than is necessary. Yes they do. They could simply put the code up on their website and leave it at that. There is no requirement to integrate patches back upstream, which is what they are doing. Quoting:I'm calling them leaches because they [...] won't even provide a minimum level of support for their devices on Linux desktops. They are not required to do that. Quoting:Their correspondence with me was full of self serving marketing speak It's called "boilerplate". It's part of the templates from the script. Again, simply don't talk to tech support about this issue. Quoting:Personally I think the best way to deal with their attitude is to dissuade as many people as possible from buying their products. What does that do for the free software community? Absolutely nothing. It looks like you're just trying to punish TomTom but your solution does not help us in any way. In my opinion, the real problem is not TomTom's attitude but the lack of PND's that are compatible with Linux desktops. And I think that the quickest way to solve that problem is to convince TomTom to start supporting Linux desktops. Because they already use Linux and because they built their application with XULRunner we have a better shot at desktop support with TomTom than with any other PND manufacturer. The only other runner up I see in that area is Nokia. They don't sell PND's but some of their phones do have that functionality. Since they work with Maemo and own Qt there is a possibility that they can supply phones that act as PND's and work with Linux desktops. |
| tuxchick Aug 17, 2009 12:43 PM EDT |
Sander, any company that does not do cross-platform compatibility in this day and age (at least Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows) is either hopelessly dim, or in the pocket of Microsoft. We should not have to beg vendors to support Linux, that's just dumb. Linux users have been buying hardware since Linux was born and getting the shaft for our troubles. They take our money, they take our code, and we should be nice to them? No. We shouldn't. *edit* Shabby customer service doesn't win any points, either. Even the dimmest front-line rep can follow a script that says "Forward this customer's concerns to someone with a clue." |
| gus3 Aug 17, 2009 12:51 PM EDT |
Quoting:Even the dimmest front-line rep can follow a script that says "Forward this customer's concerns to someone with a clue.""...and is allowed to use it." Even the front-line reps sometimes have a clue, but "No Thinking Allowed" is on a big sign over their monitors. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 17, 2009 1:20 PM EDT |
Quoting:any company that does not do cross-platform compatibility in this day and age (at least Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows) is either hopelessly dim, or in the pocket of Microsoft. I disagree. You statement would include Nokia for example. Their PC Suite for mobile phones is only available for Windows. Yet, they are a major contributor to free and open source software in many different areas, from the kernel and the Maemo to Qt and KDE. They even support my Officeshots project! They are neither dim nor in the pocket of Microsoft. |
| softwarejanitor Aug 17, 2009 1:41 PM EDT |
@Sander_Marechal When you are talking about large multinational corporations like Nokia, you can find that while parts may be enlightened and FOSS friendly, other divisions may indeed be either dim or in the pocket of Microsoft. And one hand of a company like that may not even know what the other is doing either. |
| henke54 Aug 17, 2009 1:52 PM EDT |
Quoting:any company that does not do cross-platform compatibility in this day and age (at least Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows) is either hopelessly dim, or in the pocket of Microsoft.I think not all companies are 'in the pocket of M$'... take for example this firm : SMA , a German solar device firm... they have Sunny Design : http://www.sma.de/en/products/software/sunny-design.html , a free downloadable calculating program for inverters on solarsystems,... i use it with Sun's Virtualbox... i think it is rather the words 'hopelessly dim' to use here with this firm...(i contacted them via email, asking if there was any chance to get a 'natively' linux supported file... they didn't even bother to answer me back )... ;-P |
| jdixon Aug 17, 2009 3:09 PM EDT |
> It's part of the templates from the script. Again, simply don't talk to tech support about this issue. Who is she supposed to talk to, and is their number in the manual which comes with the TomTom? The TomTom is a consumer device. She did what TomTom directed her to do, i.e., call technical support. If technical support can't handle her problem, they're the ones who are supposed to forward her to a manager. You may have noticed they did not offer to do so. TomTom management has made their priorities quite clear, and Linux user support isn't on the list. If it was, Tracyanne would have been forwarded to the folks working on the project and informed of the status, and possibly been signed up as a beta tester. The simple fact of the matter is, Tracyanne is doing the only thing most companies understand, and using the only remaining avenue available to her, making herself enough of a public nuisance that it's worth their while to fix her problem. |
| tracyanne Aug 17, 2009 5:10 PM EDT |
@Sander, I tell you what you find me the contact number/email addresses for TomTom Management/Technical boffins and I'll talk to them direct. Thye don't seem to have that information available on their website, and the only means of communicating, for the general public is via that damnable script following, do as little for the customer as possible "help" desk. Better still, you're in Holland, you should be able to easily contact the CEO, or the CTO or some such decision making person and put the case direct to them, or if you like forward their details to me, and I'll phone and or email them. What's the bet, 1/ it won't be easy even for you to find a contact, or even get past their Personal Assistant. 2/ make a dman bit of difference, or 3/ get anything intelligible regarding the Linux desktop. I note that in another thread someone who claims to work for TomTom attempts to make the case that TomTom are a Linux company, and then describes how they use Linux, including on the desktop. I'd say if they have that much desktop Linux experience, then they should have next to no trouble creating a Linux desktop Client for TomTom Home. Of course as other point out, TomTom is merely a Linux using company, who appear to have no interest in supporting the Linux desktop anywhere other than inside their own corporate offices. |
| jdixon Aug 17, 2009 5:33 PM EDT |
> ... who appear to have no interest in supporting the Linux desktop anywhere other than inside their own corporate offices. Well, to be fair, their using Linux in house is a good thing if true. Of course, as I noted in my reply on the other thread, how do they test their units if they're all running Linux and there isn't a Linux client? |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 17, 2009 5:42 PM EDT |
@softwarejanitor: So TomTom, which is listed on the international stock exchanges, has a revenue of 1.7 billion, is selling it's products in many different countries, isn't a big multinational? Quoting:She did what TomTom directed her to do, i.e., call technical support. If technical support can't handle her problem, they're the ones who are supposed to forward her to a manager. I don't think that "When will you be supporting Desktop Linux?" is really a tech support question. And TomTom did say they passed the inquiry over to the Product Management and Marketing Team. I think they haven't gotten back yet because all of TomTom's e-mails are signed by The TomTom Customer Care Team. Quoting:Tracyanne is doing the only thing most companies understand[...] making herself enough of a public nuisance that it's worth their while to fix her problem. I hope she succeeds. I just don't think that this is the best way to go about it. |
| jdixon Aug 17, 2009 6:02 PM EDT |
> And TomTom did say they passed the inquiry over to the Product Management and Marketing Team. That's what they said, yes. > I think they haven't gotten back yet because all of TomTom's e-mails are signed by The TomTom Customer Care Team. I think it's clear that they haven't gotten back to her. Let's just say your being more generous in your assumptions that they ever will than I am. :) And yes, in general, I try not to be that way, but I've been stonewalled by companies a few times myself. > I just don't think that this is the best way to go about it. It's not. But when you've exhausted the other options... |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 17, 2009 6:35 PM EDT |
I'm investigating other options... |
| kt Aug 17, 2009 7:12 PM EDT |
Sander said: "I'm investigating other options..." Maybe this direction is worth looking at for some people: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7406 http://www.fsckin.com/2008/04/06/review-four-linux-gps-packa... |
| tracyanne Aug 18, 2009 12:13 AM EDT |
Quoting:I think they haven't gotten back yet because all of TomTom's e-mails are signed by The TomTom Customer Care Team. I think, they haven't gotten back because they don't intend to, I think that, "We've passed it on to our Product Management and Marketing Team..." is a formula they use to disengage with the customer. After looking at the Ubuntu thread, it seems pretty clear to me that, that is, in fact, the truth of the matter. |
| hkwint Aug 18, 2009 3:30 AM EDT |
TC/TA et. all: Try this, their global PR-manager: Scott Johnston International Public Relations Manager scott.johnston _at_ tomtom .. com Tel: +31 6 5239 2309 Though that's a Dutch number, the name of Mr. Johnston sounds like he's not. Please keep us updated, and when using the phone remember our current timezone is UTC+2. |
| tracyanne Aug 18, 2009 3:55 AM EDT |
@hkwint, thanks, it will most likely be interesting. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 18, 2009 4:14 AM EDT |
Quoting:Maybe this direction is worth looking at for some people Actually I meant other options of talking to TomTom about this. But thanks for those links anyway :-) |
| kt Aug 18, 2009 10:19 AM EDT |
Sander said: "Actually I meant other options of talking to TomTom about this." Yes, I see -- I misread the thread. |
| cbemerine Aug 20, 2009 10:57 PM EDT |
Vendor lock in is vendor lock in. Do we really care why anymore, why they want to harm us? The facts are clear, they have and are (most hardware vendors) still attempting (in vain) to lock customers into their platform. The only reason I can imagine for this is that they are afraid they will be unable to innovate in order to keep customers, therefore they plan to be shifty, evil and sneaky from the beginning. My suggestion to all: Enact a 3 - 7 year moratorium on purchasing from that vendor. A 3 or 7 year "wait and watch but do not purchase" period. The 3/7 year clock begins when they release open source drivers within the same calendar month as their proprietary operating system preference they cater too. That clock gets reset if any new product is released with ONLY PROPRIETARY hardware or device drivers. Hardware that you can not run on Linux, because the company has NOT released the specs or the device drivers for Linux and Unix. By insisting on a 3 or 7 year track record, you can never be fooled again. If after 3 or 7 years they have proven by their ACTIONS (they can only lie with words not actions) by releasing drivers and/or schematics for open source and Linux, then by all means consider their products once again. It really is the only way to be sure. Hand helds ~ think Maemo or Android (are their any fully Linux compatible OSs for hand helds besides these two?) The test, can I install a Linux application and run it on the device? If not, why not. Netbooks ~ only if it runs a Linux distro, there are so many available today, there is no reason not to seek them out. Netbooks are NOT meant to be desktop replacements, even if the netbooks hardware surpasses the development PCs of the past. Funny when you consider it that way. I remember when a 4 mhz PC was considered a development machine and it did NOT have a hard disk, no PCs did back then. Laptops, PCs, Towers ~ ONLY purchase from 100% Linux companies like System 76 or ZaReason. Hey you can always install Windows on this hardware, but the same can not be said if you buy a Windows computer with Vendor lock (ed) in hardware, software and device drivers. And when a company drops support for your hardware, at least you know you have another option for it beside the dump. (IMPORTANT NOTE: It might be time to build your computer from the ground up with the ONLY open source BIOS, COREBOOT. Thus any problem encountered has the potential to be fixed. As you have access to all that you need to fix it, even development tool kits. Today Coreboot supports hundreds of motherboards and other hardware. At least you will be able to tweak it if you need too.) How do you decide on either 3 or 7 years, easy, how long has the company being playing badly, saying one thing, but doing another. If it has been a 10 years or more (you can think of at least one company here I know, one company that I can think of has been behaving badly for almost 20 years now and for that they have LOST MY TRUST) than 7 years might be an appropriate penalty for them to pay. If it has been less than say 7 years or 10 years, than a 3 year penalty period might suffice. If fewer people purchase their products maybe they will actually do the right thing on the front end and if they do not, you are giving time for an honest open source and Linux friendly company (think competitor to them) to arise. The best thing about this type of penalty, is that each company has a choice. Play fair, innovate and we will purchase your products. However try to lock us in, even once and we will put off purchasing anything you produce for a minimum of 3 years. Since you can NOT trust their marketing FUD, we must all let their actions speak louder than their words. If you base your purchases on a positive track record, you can NOT be taken advantage of without it costing the company dearly in future sales. You want our business, not only MUST you EARN our TRUST, you MUST keep EARNING our TRUST! As it should be. BTW the Nokia's N770, N800, N880 and newly release N900 run Maemo (Linux) and accept a GPS module (extra charge), so you have a solution and have had this solution since 2005, though you might not have been aware of it. The N900 was announced this month. Also some other hardware companies have announced support on hand helds for Maemo. (Google Android gives you yet another option, if you can get it with GPS, I have not checked, makes sense that it should offer GPS hardware support to go with Googles software GPS capabilities via Google Earth.) If a hand held does not support Linux, than it is inferior. Do not purchase it. I would suggest to you that it is NOT SMART. Smart hardware supports Linux. The Nokias are examples of true smart phones, they just do not lock you in to a cellular plan and that is a good thing. Full Disclosure: I do NOT work for Google, Nokia, or any company that I have mentioned here, though I would be honored to be a Product Manager for any company entering the hand held market, Netbook or embedded hardware marketplace with a superior open source and Linux enabled product. Just saying. Today companies can safely migrating from any proprietary solution to an equal or superior open source solution. There are currently NO EXCEPTIONS that I am aware of, as over the last year any remaining gaps in hardware or software have been filled very effectively with viable open source compatible solutions. Anyone fortunate enough to work on these types of migrations must find the work extremely fulfilling and enjoy going to work every day. Of course its an added plus that the company ends up with a lower TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) thanks to the migration. Such a company would be a better financial investment also as they are reducing costs and making future funds available to increase products and marketing to sale more product. I wonder how many investors are paying attention to this? Would be a sure sign of a well run company with a smart executive board! I would not be surprised to find one or two proprietary software solutions that will run better, I am just currently NOT aware of any. Considering that their are over 500 Content Management Systems available for you today, is there anything that you can not get a computer or server to do to increase the profitability of your business? I think not. If a company continues to innovate, well they built it, why shouldn't you purchase it. But ask yourself the next time you see their new release, have they really innovated? And be honest about it. |
| caitlyn Aug 21, 2009 12:37 AM EDT |
Quoting:ONLY purchase from 100% Linux companies like System 76 or ZaReason. I disagree strongly. The only reason companies like Dell and HP are expanding their Linux offerings is because the sales justify it. The more we buy from them the more Linux friendly they will become. Both companies do a decent job supporting *nix on the server so they should be able to do the same on the desktop, laptop, or netbook. I have nothing against System 76 or ZaReason, but every time I looked at them they simply weren't price competitive. My advice is simpler: only buy with Linux preinstalled. That way the Linux market share (which is measured by sales, not desktops in use) goes up and more hardware vendors decide Linux is worthy of support. If the best system for you is one from System 76 or ZaReason then by all means support those companies. If you can get a better deal on a Dell or an HP or another machine that comes with Linux preinstalled then by all means go for that as well. |
| gus3 Aug 21, 2009 12:45 AM EDT |
I would refine that even a little more: Only buy with Linux preinstalled, from a company that's honest about Linux in its PR (sales literature and statistics). Even if you can buy a Linux system from Some Big Vendor, does it do any good if they buckle under Microsoft and minimize their Linux sales figures? |
| lamapper Aug 21, 2009 5:05 PM EDT |
Sorry Caitlyn I must respectfully disagree with you and agree with gus3. Too many companies, Dell being one of them, pay lip service to Linux and cater to Microsoft. And it always sets Linux back, and the repeat the cycle over and over and over again. If you never do anything to punish the offenders how are they going to learn their lesson. The Linux market is huge and getting bigger. Two companies, Novell and Redhat both have well over 8 to 14 million Linux users, wish I had the article in front of me as I would post a link to it. That is only two Linux companies of many. The point is that one FUD marketing technique non-Linux companies use to justify their wrongful neglect, is to state that the Linux and Unix marketplaces are too small to matter. LIES, Lies and more lies. FUD, Fud, fud. Therefore why should they (hardware companies, device driver companies and BIOS developers) do anything to help Linux. Especially when Microsoft, un-offiically, tells them what they want and based on that one un-offiical, never to be proven conversation, companies that could increase their sales by development for Linux either do NOT, or worse pay lip service that they support Linux, when the reality is something very different. More of a shell game for them as they do not want to piss anyone off and that might cost them sales. Look at how Microsoft forces the retail chain to pre-purchase a large number of their new operating system software or else they will be alloted less quantities in future releases. You can NOT say that, that does not happen as it has been documented. Of course those un-official conversations are rarely if ever put on paper and are denied in public. All involved know how it makes them look to the buying public. NOT GOOD. And it artificially inflates the number of purchases of the new OS which is used as more marketing FUD. Again this only hurts the Linux / Unix marketplace and they know it. Sadly for them, the average user that I know is either already aware or becoming aware of this bad practice. The fact is that they KNOW the Linux market place is significant, not just in total users and lower TCO, Total Cost of Ownership, but in the developer market itself. What developer worth his salt does not want to be able to go into the low level part of an application, operating system, device driver or even the BIOS (thank you Coreboot) and modify or add some C (if you can program C++, you should be able to handle C) code and fix a problem that was neglected by the manufacturer, often by design. (The most notable example that leaps to mind is when the BIOS manufacturers had branches for every Microsoft OS, including ones no longer supported like (95/98, ME, etc...) but only one branch for every flavor of Linux and Unix. Worse yet, the Linux branch did not work correctly with the end result being that the internal fan did not shut off and shut on at the correct times to keep the PC cool enough. Of course the PC overheated and locked up and would not run correctly. All the proprietary companies simply blamed Linux, not their problem. Unfortunately for them and especially the proprietary BIOS manufacturer the hacker/coder who owned the machine was able to reverse engineer the BIOS well enough to figure out what was wrong, the BIOS. It would have been illegal for him to modify and correct the problem because the BIOS was proprietary, even for his own use and NOT for resale. Had he been told upfront that the motherboard + processor combo used a BIOS that was nasty to Linux and catered to Microsoft on the front end by design, he could of avoided the problem and bought a superior, Linux compatible motherboard. Of course they have financial business reasons for not being up front not they would be allowed to be honest, as it would cost them their Microsoft business, probably 40 - 60% of their cash flow. The point is that these proprietary vendors can make back room deals to screw over the Linux community, specifically catering to another proprietary vendor and there is nothing you can do about that. If you ever even hear about it. In my 20+ years I have only been made privy to two examples, though I would be hard pressed to prove either. No the only viable solution is to make it so reprehensible to ALL, that they refuse to be a party to it. You hit them where it hurts, in sales period, their cash flow. Is it fair that an Intel on board video/sound chip set works for Microsoft, but not Linux? And Intel is better than many about supporting the open source community. Is it fair that Nvidia will release device drivers for their new hardware, especially their GPUs (Graphical Processor Units) ONLY for Windows. Granted lately they are getting better, they just released the 8xxx drivers. Sure they eventually release the drivers into open source two or three years later. That two or three year hold on releasing new technology only serves to give the Microsoft platform a HUGE competitive advantage over every other OS (Linux, Unix and MacIntosh). Why do you think you only see 6xxx and this year finally 8xxx Nvidia drivers being offered with either System 76 or ZaReason PC offerings. Because those companies were denied a seat at the table. The new processors were out. Anyone working with Video or heavy graphics needed these boards as they loaded up to 50% of the processing off the processor, freeing it up to do other work....huge if that was your business. Who could use them, ONLY Microsoft. Is that remotely fair? Their excuse was probably that the Linux market was too small and our development resources were limited. Note even if true, indicating a business decision failure IMO, it certainly is NOT fair. Both Intel and Nvidia and every other hardware manufacturer wants the bleeding edge developers to write software and device drivers for their hardware offerings, opening new markets. Trust me, they do NOT want to offend that specific group no matter what the percentages of Microsoft to Linux/Unix to MacIntosh may be. Regardless of what they say publicly. And if any hardware vendor does NOT have the in house resources to do the coding to get their new hardware to work for Linux and Unix, there is a solution readily available to them. The Kernel Driver project: http://www.linuxdriverproject.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/Driver... they will even work with the proprietary vendor under an NDA to create a GPL compliant version of the driver. Sounds strange I know, see the FAQ: http://www.linuxdriverproject.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/Freque... As for System76 and ZaReason not being competitive, are you CRAZY or just have not looked recently. Both offer PCs in the $300 - $400 range that will run either Beryl or Compiz and can handle the heaviest of processing loads. Your statement is simply not true, perhaps you were unaware or work for DELL. They also offer more expensive machines with more processors, more memory, etc, like every PC manufacturer out there. One only needs to go to their websites to see for themselves. They are extremely price competitive, even when you consider shipping costs. And they do not bury that they build Linux PCs, way down in their website like Dell does. Also, since the PCs are designed with Linux in mind, they will always run linux, including Video, Sound, WiFi, USB and more. I do not work for either company. Having got screwed over by Lindros with their proprietary agreement with Microsoft for device drivers I will never let that happen again. Next time the Linux PC I buy will work with Linux out fo the box and I mean everything. And future upgrades will be less of a hassle or hassle free, thanks to my foresight. Ideally I will have a Coreboot installable motherboard as well, if not Coreboot running on it. When the average user buys a Window PC and either wants to install dual boot or when Microsoft stops supporting the only versions of the operating system that will work on that PC's hardware based on processor, memory or hard disk space what then? No wonder the average users still is unaware the Linux just works out of the box. Sound, Video, USB, WiFi while not the only issues are some of the biggest one sees when going through the forums and wikis looking for help with configuration issues. 90% of the time its because of proprietary hardware or proprietary device drivers, all of which would have been avoided had the PC been bought from a Linux vendor. The average user is simply NOT aware that the fault is NOT Linux in many instances, but a proprietary vendor catering to Microsoft. Of course Linux gets blamed, is that fair? It really sucks when those same proprietary companies that cause the configuration errors will blame Linux. Even when they know its their fault. Heck I have been in a shop where Microsoft denied the problem was with their products, only to be outed months later as having lied. They knew it but did not have a solution for the problem, so they denied the existence of the problem. Any one who as worked in corporate america for any length of time understands that this is standard operating practice for poorly managed companies. After all it can never be the companies fault, you might not purchase their products. They do this over and over again. So do you really think they even think about lying about Linux, Unix or MacIntosh. Come on get real. I knew one company where the problems were always blamed on someone in the operations department, otherwise people might not purchase the application software or the companies consulting services had they known the truth. Years later I compared notes with another person who worked there, the fault was always operator error, lol. Thankfully another company got tired of that company's shenanigans and bought the company, straightened it out and made it better. But in the interim many lives were messed up due to their shoddy business practices. Now can any consumer control what a company markets and states as fact? Of course not. Since we can NOT believe them by their design, what other choice is there? The only real solution is to stop purchasing their products until they have established a more customer friendly business practice over a period of years. That way you are relying on their ACTIONS, period. Their words, their marketing, their FUD, no longer matters. The question is how many years is an appropriate punishment and more importantly how many years constitutes an effective positive track record? If the company has been misleading consumers for 20 years or more, 7 years might be appropriate. Newer companies a minimum of 3 years should do it. After 3 years of working to regain your TRUST, it is highly unlikely they would allow a poor manager to burn that TRUST that would take them an additional 3 years to earn. It becomes a business incentive. Stop being afraid that hardware vendors will not release products for Linux because people are NOT buying. This is more FUD. They want, no they need sales for operating systems other than Microsoft. And Microsoft keeps burning their bridges with key hardware providers, so trust me these hardware manufacturers are dying for more markets to sell their products to other than Microsoft. The sales of Linux enabled netbooks, really opened many eyes over the last two years. And Microsoft does not have a solution for under 512 MB of RAM other than XP, which they are discontinuing. How do you think they should be treated? Should they earn your TRUST? Of course they should. And once they have abused your TRUST? What then? Should the average person be required to research every nuance of every piece of their computer, including the BIOS and how it functions with that combination of hardware, of course not, but that is where we stand today. If you want to be sure your PC will run Linux, buy from a Linux vendor, make sure video, audio, USB, WiFi, 10/100/1000 Ethernet, etc all work out of the box. Because if they work on day one, they will work 3, 7 and 10 years later. Best of all, you can always purchase the Windows Operating System stand alone if you love it that much, with the guarantee that it will simply work on your Linux designed hardware. The opposite scenario most certainly is NOT true. And when you consider that the netbook computers (Asus Eee PC 701, Surf, 901 and up) are more powerful than the power user development PCs we used when they first came out, why not repurpose the hardware when Microsoft stops supporting it. As they always do eventually, that much we can all COUNT ON. Why fill up the dumps, please before you do that find a charity to donate it to. For home use, what about your own customized DVD Player/Recorder. (The cable and satellite companies DVD/DVRs are a joke technologically. A router/Firewall with full logging information and better security. Your own home WiFi Access point. Heck, just a home file server for your own personal use. I am sure you can think of other purposes, real time monitoring and device controlling of your home, the list is huge. Anything is better than putting it in the dump. Only Linux and Unix give you an option to repurpose your machine, once other companies have stopped supporting it. So why not do yourself a favor and buy your PC from a Linux vendor, even if you want to install Windows. At least down the road you will have options that would otherwise be denied to you. Isn't that what freedom of choice is all about anyway. |
| jdixon Aug 21, 2009 6:06 PM EDT |
> Two companies, Novell and Redhat both have well over 8 to 14 million Linux users, wish I had the article in front of me as I would post a link to it. Fedora alone may have over 14 million: http://jspaleta.livejournal.com/42464.html Ubuntu thinks they have around 8 million: http://www.workswithu.com/2009/07/24/measuring-ubuntus-marke... If those figures are correct, and the other distros combine add up to even half of that (I'd guess they're far more), then there are over 30 million Linux desktop users. And that doesn't even consider the Novell and Red Hat corporate desktop users. That figure is backed up in another manner. Microsoft itself admits to a 1-2% market share on the desktop as the lower bound. Computer Industry Almanac says there were 1.2 Billion computers in use world wide. A 1% market share would then be 12 million users, and a 2% share would be 24 million users. Microsoft's chart showing OS usage at http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/macbook/microsoft_... on the other hand, shows something more in the range of 10%, and that would give us about 120 million users. That's probably and upper bound at this point. I personally think we're somewhere around 5% and working our way toward 10%. |
| jdixon Aug 21, 2009 6:30 PM EDT |
> Your statement is simply not true, perhaps you were unaware or work for DELL. That was completely uncalled for. Caitlyn's Linux credentials are well known and firmly established. And I can vouch that in past times when I'd check prices on ZaReason, they were NOT competitive with what I can build on my own or buy from Dell. You are correct that their prices are far more competitive now. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 22, 2009 2:31 AM EDT |
Quoting:I can vouch that in past times when I'd check prices on ZaReason, they were NOT competitive with what I can build on my own or buy from Dell. You are correct that their prices are far more competitive now. I agree. ZaReason used to be pretty expensive. It's a lot better now. That said, I still build my own machines. If not for the price advantage then because I want to know exactly what goes in the box and want to make customisations. For example, I always replace the northbridge fan with a heatsink. The small, cheap, plastic northbridge fan is one of the loudest components in a computer, even louder than the CPU fan. |
| hkwint Sep 02, 2009 12:53 PM EDT |
TA and I received an answer. Willing to publish it TA? |
| tracyanne Sep 02, 2009 4:49 PM EDT |
SO did I HK, I've gone back for clarification. on some points. If you want to publish, go right ahead |
| hkwint Sep 03, 2009 4:23 AM EDT |
I'll wait and hope you receive some clarification TA. At least some response it seems, and you have their attention. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 13, 2009 5:28 PM EDT |
So.... any updates on this yet? |
| tracyanne Sep 13, 2009 9:34 PM EDT |
Yes, it boils down to "get lost". They are "working" on the "problem" (to use their marketing speak) What the "problem" is they won't say. basically I don't think they give a rats about Linux users, and so long as there is plenty of free code, and plenty of developers working on it for free, i think they are more than happy with the Linux FOSS ecosystem. I'll publish later |
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!