Zaurus Sync Software (Finally) Available for Linux

Tony Green writes "One of the biggest gripes of early Zaurus users (with much justification) was the fact that despite the fact that the Zaurus itself runs Linux, the only synchronisation software made available was for Windoze machines. Trolltech have now released a desktop synch program (albeit a beta at the moment) for Linux, so at last Linux users can start doing what the rest could already do. Information at The Zaurus Software Index or Trolltech One word of warning though, the MySQL installation on my Zaurus became unusable after using this; I haven't worked out exactly what it did yet, but I ended up having to completely re-initialise the Zaurus and then restore everything from my backups. So not recommended if you're running MySQL (unless you're feeling brave...)"

Comments

Proper spellings

[Mr_Silver]

made available was for Windoze machines

You know, this is one of my big beefs. I know that Slashdot editors aren't exactly renown for their spelling abilities - but I think it would be rather nice if they could correct deliberate misspellings like this.

One of the things we all (I hope) advocate is the usage of something apart from Microsoft. That is Microsoft, not Micro$oft, Microsfot, Microcrap and any of the other 1001 illiterations that you find.

Maybe it's just me, but someone who deliberately misspells a company name comes across as a 14 year old and almost immediately wants me to completely dismiss the point they're making.

Harsh, maybe. But lets not alienate potential users by looking childish with our spellings.

Linux can and is a viable alternative - let us not give people the impression we're 14 year old script kiddies who think it's "cool" to munge corporate names.

Re:Proper spellings

[DonkeyJimmy]

I think it would be rather nice if they[slashdot editors] could correct deliberate misspellings like this[windoze].

Weather or not you believe that we of slashdot shouldn't intentially misspell words doesn't mean that slash dot moderators have the right (leave alone obligation) to change the things we do on purpose (short of racist remarks, profanity, etc.).

If anything, you should be condeming the poster. I would be furious if a slashdot editor changed anything on my, or anyone elses, post like that.

let us not give people the impression we're 14 year old script kiddies. . .

I didn't think we were in the buisness of trying to look good for potential users. I think most people here just want to have an "intelligent" discussion about things they care about.

Re:Proper spellings

[gujo-odori]

There's nothing wrong with bashing Microsoft. People hate Microsoft because Microsoft has worked hard to make them hate it. Remember how popular Microsoft once was? Remember when Bill Gates' "The Road Ahead" was a huge seller? People commonly viewed neither Gates nor his company as being capable of doing wrong in those days. I should know. I was one of them. Things change. People wise up. Now, since Microsoft has worked so hard to earn all of this ill will, we would not want to cheat them out of their so richly deserved reward and disappoint them, would we?

However, I do not view making Linux more "user friendly" as a good thing. What you and many other people really mean by that is "Let's make a Linux for people who don't know anything about computers and don't want to." Maybe you don't realize you mean that, but it's true. The trouble is that apart from the sheer difficulty of doing so, this would not be a Good Thing. Why not? Because doing that to Linux or any other *nix is going to take away so much of what makes it *nix. Stop and think. Linux and the rest of the *nix family is a server operating system, first and foremost. And it has not one but two decent GUIs that are already quite good enough (but still getting better nevertheless) that not only sysadmins like me but many other power users and near power users can use it as their full-time desktop OS. Beyond that, Linux, particularly when running KDE, is good enough for the corporate desktop Right Now. [1] [2]

But Linux for Aunt Mable? Uh-uh. I don't believe you can do that without breaking most of what Linux is today for most of the people who use it. For years, I was an advocate of user-friendly Linux. My mind was gradually changed by the kind of people I saw coming to Linux. Not people who wanted to learn, to give back, to teach those who came after them the way those who went before me taught me. Not people who wanted to improve the product for the sake of improving it. There were some of those, of course, but they were a minority.

What did we get? Whiners. Losers. Trolls. People who came into Linux and said "You owe me something." The whole attitude was/is one of demanding that since they've tried this "Linux thing" that the community - the LUG they found, the author of the package that bugs them this week, somebody, anybody - owes them help, bug fixes, feature requests, whatever. The idea and ideal that this is a self-help community founded on the ideal and idealism of Linux and Free Software is totally lost on them. I really believed in Linux for the masses. Now I've come to my senses. There are many places where Linux or a *BSD is the best tool available, and this includes corporate workstations. But there are places where it just doesn't belong, too. Aunt Mable's desk is one of them.

For people who want to get away from MS but want a vendor they can demand things from (or try to), who want all the user friendliness, etc., I strongly and highly recommend a Mac running OS X. Apple has done a truly marvelous job, and OS X is onlyk going to get better with time. For the typical end-user market, Apple is where it's at now. OS X has a terrific UI, is easy to use (something Apple has always shot for and largely achieved better than MS), and has the power of *nix underneath the hood.

Yes, I know OS X is proprietary, and I'm all for Free Software. But I also know that there are people who just aren't right for Free Software, and it isn't right for them either. The people I described above. There is no such thing as a free lunch, yet that's what they try to get out of Free Software. They are far better off buying a good but proprietary product from a good and innovative company like Apple.

And do you know what? The Free Software community is better off, too. We don't have to deal with it. Free and Open Source software can be present on an OS X system, but Apple is in between them and us. I like it that way. I've never owned a Mac before, but my next computer purchase will be an iBook. Maybe it'll dual-boot Linux and OS X, or maybe not. It might be OS X only. That's how good it is.

There is a lot of business-friendliness in Linux, and a lot of that in OS X, too. I truly believe that most businesses would be better off with a Linux, Apple, or mixed Linux/Apple network than with a Windows network. We should do a lot of this. However, beware of letting too much user friendliness into Linux. You'll be sorry.

You'll have to excuse me while I go off and write some anti-Micro$oft tracts about much Windoze blows chunks and draw Borg attachments on Dr. Evi^H^H^H uh, I mean, Bill Gates. Or is that Winblows? Or just 'doze? Whatever.

Now run along and buy your Aunt Mable a Mac. And maybe a Linux-based PDA to go with it. The embedded market is a place where Linux can really shine. This is, although user-friendly, not a Bad Thing because - as in the Apple case - you have a vendor standing between the community and the people who are using the software but don't want to be in the community. They are the vendor's problem.

[1] By "corporate desktop" I mean an environment where there is a professional administrator (or at least someone who plays one on TV) overseeing the IT operations. Windows networks should have one of these too, of course, and the reason many don't is a combination of tight budgets (or just plain cheapness) combined with technicall non-savvy managers buying into the Microsoft sizzle that tried to make people think you don't really need admins. Lack of admins is a big reason for Code Red, Klez, et al, spreading the way they did.

[2] No, I'm not out to pump up KDE at the expensve of Gnome. In fact, I personally prefer and use Gnome. However, KDE is better for the corporate desktop environment at this point. It's better for new users at this point.

Beta only

[Mika_Lindman]

(albeit a beta at the moment)

That's still better than most linux software, just go to www.sourceforge.net and see how mony projects ever gets past alpha-stage.

Re:Beta only

[henley]

That's still better than most linux software, just go to www.sourceforge.net and see how mony projects ever gets past alpha-stage.

That's unfair, and comparing apples with oranges.

Think of a project on sourceforge as being a low-cost representation of an idea, rather than as a product. So the first thing you do is register your idea - or, if you're a fan of Homesteading the Noosphere, you "stake your claim". Then you see if there's interest, think a bit more about the problem and/or solution you're proposing, maybe try a few bits of code out.

Often times, what you deride as "alpha" level software is perfectly acceptable v1.0 shipping product from some large commercial suppliers (er, actually most commercial vendors). Their business model appears to be ship a minimally-functional product, if it works use the proceeds to fund v2.0

Remember also that that Alpha code may just do exactly what you want it to do - no final product required! Often times within the context of these sorts of connectivity programs, alpha-code is sufficient to prove the concept, wherein it becomes more profitable to roll the actual functionality into a larger project - e.g. Evolution's palm-sync equivalent, or a specific camera's photo-download software into gPhoto2 or similar.

In short, if I expect to have to pay for software, then I expect a Beta programme to a) provide an early look at the functionality b) provide an early look at the quality of the product before committing anything to it. If, on the otherhand, I'm crusin' sourceforge for solutions, then oftentimes a demonstration-quality Alpha release is more than enough to make a decision on whether to adopt, adapt, collaborate or ignore the project...

A PDA should mean less work not more

[Anonymous Coward]

Articles like this make me roar with laughter. I've had a Palm for years and never had as much trouble as you high-and-mighty Zarus guys. My Palm PDA, just like my real palm, just works. Having a PDA means less work not more.

"Hey lookie I got my PDA to sync! It only took a kernel rebuild and installing some 3rd-party Beta software!"

Schmucks

Deceptive and Wrong

[FreeUser]

That's still better than most linux software, just go to www.sourceforge.net and see how mony projects ever gets past alpha-stage.

I'm sure there are any number of pro-Microsoft(tm) zealots and astroturfers who will take exception to this, but my (and, I think, most people's) experience suggests that most alpha-stage GNU, Linux, and BSD projects are far and away more stable and reliable than their Windows(tm) equivelents, if perhaps less polished on the install and user-interface side.

In other words, those pre-alpha and alpha projects are often already far and away better than many of their Microsoft(tm) counterparts (if such even exist, which is often NOT the case), and are certainly very useful to GNU/Linux users long before they reach beta or final release status, in contrast to many offerings from Redmond, which remain unstable and marginally useful long after people have begun paying good money for them.

Free software developers, being subject to public peer review, are generally much more conservative in how they label their projects than Microsoft(tm) and some other commercial enterprises are, as anyone who has used both can readilly attest. It is particularly deceptive of disingenous for pro-Microsoft(tm) zealots to be using that conservatism in nomenclature to imply an inferiority in the software being released that, emperically, simply doesn't exist in most cases.