An Open Source Guide For The Average PC User

prostoalex writes "The regular Yahoo! News feature Tech Tuesday this week is dedicated to open source software for the home user. Open source for all spells out the open source ideas for a regular PC user, while providing some helpful links to some popular software. The open source PC is a guide on most popular open source apps that would be common for a home user to have. Is open source for you? discusses shortcomings of open source software and cases when it's not recommended." From the article: "Never fear, counterculture types. You can still liberate the code, and experience many other perks, by becoming part of the open-source movement. With the steadily increasing number of open-source applications on the Web, there are more projects than ever to check out, covering nearly every imaginable application: from word processors and e-mail applications to media players and video games."

Comments

linux.slashdot.org?

[Colin Smith]

Shouldn't that be linux(tm).slashdot.org now?

Re:linux.slashdot.org?

[W12x40]

If I read this book, will I be qualified to begin a long /. career of M$-bashing?

Re:linux.slashdot.org?

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux is a registered Trademark of Linus Torvalds, so it would be linux(r).slashdot.org

Re:linux.slashdot.org?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're here, you're already qualified.

But what about Macintosh users?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this take into consideration the needs of your typical Macintosh user?

Re:But what about Macintosh users?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm... tastes a bit nutty!

Wrong section

[oringo]

Shouldn't this go under IT instead of Linux?

Re:Wrong section

[SunPin]

Does it matter?

OpenCD

[saskboy]

http://www.theopencd.org/
Is a common link when a topic like this comes up.

I find I can make a more current and better CD than OpenCD, and I'd encourage other geeks to compile their own Open Software CDs, and recommend software to their friends. If they're looking to record sounds, use Audacity. If they want to borrow your Word CD, show them Open Office 1.9.122.

If they want to rip their CD collection, install CDex for them and show them the CDDB button, then press F9.

Re:OpenCD

[Adelbert]

This episode of LUGRadio has an interview with Henrik Nielsen Omma, who maintains the OpenCD project. Its well worth a listen, particularly when he talks about his collaboration with Ubuntu.

Re:OpenCD

[Intron]

The OpenCD will always be a bit behind the latest version. Not only are the producers always testing new versions, but they are also packaging them with installers, instructions, translations and other helpful stuff. The idea is to get working software to Windows users, not to be bleeding edge. You can download a copy of The OpenCD and hand it out to friends without worrying about whether they are going to come back and complain that you trashed their PC.

Re:OpenCD

[ak3ldama]

If I am not mistaken, 1.9.X would be a beta for version 2. It SUCKS! It crashed 8 times while preparing for my AI class presentation. Luckily it recovered after the first crash, so from that point on I was religiously hitting Ctrl-s, just like in the old days when Windows 9x and MS Office crashed often. So, give friends a stable OO.org not the new crappy one. The last thing we need is regular users getting beta builds.

Re:OpenCD

[saskboy]

"going to come back and complain that you trashed their PC."

The problem is that with most modern software, it introduces remotely exploitable security holes if it's not kept up to date, and if your friend doesn't have a firewall. What will happen when they install Firefox 1.0.1 from the CD for example? They'll be instantly asked to install another version and might think that its strange that the "new" program they just put on already has a "problem" with it.

I acknowlege and agree that stable versions must be provided, but it would be nice if they offered an "updated" folder on it too, making note that it's untested but should work similar to the other tested software on the disc.

Re:OpenCD

[KlaymenDK]

Awesome link, that one. Do you know if there are transscrips to be had instead of audio?

Re:OpenCD

[saskboy]

It hardly ever crashes for me, and opens Word Perfect files, so if they use Word Perfect give them 1.9.x and tell them it's the beta testing version so might not work, and if so, install 1.1.4 stable instead.

Re:OpenCD

[killjoe]

Personally I am against the opencd idea. Furthermore I am against people porting open source projects to windows in the first place. How is linux supposed to gain popularity if all the "killer apps" also run on windows?

Knoppix is a much better idea. Pack all the apps with a linux distro and give that instead. It would give windows users more of a stark choice. Either pay for office or use linux+oo, either pay for photoshop or use linux+gimp. If the users can install gimp and oo and still use windows why would they ever switch?

Re:OpenCD

[FCKGW]

Most Windows users won't switch to open source software if they have to throw out their existing operating system and switch cold turkey. Even if it's on a live CD such as Knoppix, that's a lot of unnecessary rebooting and confusion. Besides, if someone eventually wants to switch to an open source OS such as GNU/Linux or *BSD, it's much easier when they have already been using cross-platform OSS applications already and don't have to switch those.

One step at a time is much, much easier than all at once. And since Free Software is about freedom and choice, the user always has the choice to stay with OSS, go back to proprietary software, or some combination of the two.

Re:OpenCD

[YoungHack]

> ... I'd encourage other geeks to compile their own Open Software CDs,

Like
    http://limestone.truman.edu/pub/fsck/freecd/doc/

Re:OpenCD

[ozmanjusri]

How is linux supposed to gain popularity if all the "killer apps" also run on windows?

By being better. That's one of the key points of open source, it makes for better, and because developers are free to "stand on the shoulders of giants", more innovative software. If it doesn't achieve that, people should stay with the alternatives.

Re:OpenCD

[killjoe]

"Besides, if someone eventually wants to switch to an open source OS such as GNU/Linux or *BSD, it's much easier when they have already been using cross-platform OSS applications already and don't have to switch those."

I have heard this argument before and I disagree with it. I still don't see why they would switch to linux if they can run all their windows apps AND all their open source apps in windows. Just doesn't make sense to me.

What drove the adoption of apple II was visicalc. What drove the adoption of MS-DOS was DBASE and wordperfect. Every platform needs a killer app that only runs on that platform and gives users a reason to switch. Linux does not have such a thing. Everything that runs on linux also runs on windows.

Re:OpenCD

[killjoe]

"By being better."

History shows that being better has nothing to do with popularity or adoption. Nothing, nada, zip, zilch. Please get that thought out of your head.

It has to be "good enough" (minimally functional), it has to be cheaper, it has to look good. Those are the most important factors.

Most open source apps today are "good enough" and cheaper. Some of them look good too. There is enough there to lure users to switch but not if they can use the same apps in windows.

Re:OpenCD

[ozmanjusri]

History shows that being better has nothing to do with popularity or adoption. Nothing, nada, zip, zilch. Please get that thought out of your head.

No, I won't get that thought out of my head, and you might like to try being a little less patronising when you post that sort of advice. Better is why I make my selections, and that's enough to drive my use of open source.

There is enough there to lure users to switch but not if they can use the same apps in windows.

That just means that the moment, open source operating systems are not sufficiently better to give most users a compelling reason to change.

The best conditions for software users will be when we can independantly change hardware, operating system or software at will without having to update the whole stack. At the moment, there is immense platform inertia as a result of this tight coupling, and it's resulting severe restrictions to innovation.

In projects like Wine, Xen, Hypervisor, Basilisk, etc, we can see aspects of computing heading towards abstracting those different layers, and I think open source will be necessary to achive that goal. The experience open source teams are getting with cross-platform tools, and the technologies they are developing to work in cross-platform environments are huge advantages over singl-platform teams. Proprietary players have too much invested in platform lockdown to play friendly with others, so they're not likely to drive this.

When your open source OS of choice can run any binary applications you chose on any hardware platform you chose, then there will be a compelling reason to change.

Re:OpenCD

[killjoe]

"No, I won't get that thought out of my head, and you might like to try being a little less patronising when you post that sort of advice. Better is why I make my selections, and that's enough to drive my use of open source. "

You are not typical. History shows again and again that superior products don't always win in the marketplace. In the marketplace cheap is better then good. Nice looking is better then ugly. Good enough is good enough.

If you don't believe me ask walmart.

Re:OpenCD

[ozmanjusri]

If you don't believe me ask walmart.

I can't. They haven't made it over here - too many better alternatives...

Re:OpenCD

[Anonymous Coward]

What has Open Source got to do with Linux? Linux is just one Open Source/Free Operating System that a bunch of Open Source/Free software happens to run on. That doesn't mean that Linux is, or should be, the only platform that software runs on.

I for one want to see as much Open Source/Free software used as is possible, and I happen to think Linux sucks. I see no problem with encouraging Open Source without encouraging Linux.

Re:OpenCD

[dylan_-]

If you don't believe me ask walmart.

I can't. They haven't made it over here - too many better alternatives...

Aren't you from the UK? If you are, Asda is Walmart.

Re:OpenCD

[oojah]

Transcriptions are under way and are stored on the wiki at http://wiki.lugradio.org/index.php/Main_Page

Unfortunately it doesn't look as though episode 34 has been transcribed yet.

Listen to the audio, they are great :)

Re:OpenCD

[ozmanjusri]

Aren't you from the UK? If you are, Asda is Walmart.

Nope, Australia. There's a whole bunch of players in the Walmart space over here.

Re:OpenCD

[saskboy]

You're forgetting the marketing and migration side of reality. You can't just tell someone that they can and should switch, you have to give them a roadmap or an application that will migrate their data. Presumably, if you've switched your documents to Open Office, and your IM to GAIM before you go to Linux, the transition will be much smoother.

Re:OpenCD

[killjoe]

"Nope, Australia. There's a whole bunch of players in the Walmart space over here."

Not for long. Wait till walmart decides to enter your country, all those companies will go out of business within five years.

Re:OpenCD

[ozmanjusri]

Not for long. Wait till walmart decides to enter your country, all those companies will go out of business within five years.

Unlikely. They'll be trying to gain a foothold in a market that's already filled by the likes of Aldi etc. Margins are already so low I don't think even Walmart would be able to undercut them, certainly not for long enough to get the sort of market share they're chasing.

Re:OpenCD

[andrew_0812]

Try asking Google. They came around and were better than any alternatives. The people who look for the best service changed. Slowly it caught on, and eventually the people who just follow the crowd were changing. Now everyone uses it because it is THE search service to use. It may take time, but all other things being equal, people will find the better solution. And with OSS being free, and CSS being expensive, all other things are not equal, but help push in the direction of OSS.

Re:Not recommended?!?!?

[IWantMoreSpamPlease]

>>That would be the chapter about running more inferior, costly solutions?

You mean, custom, business-specific, fully supported 24x7, money-back guarantee if it fails, applications, right?

Re:Not recommended?!?!?

[$RANDOMLUSER]

Not really. The roads are full of people who have no clue how to drive a car with a clutch and a manual transmission. If you suddenly told them that they would not only have to do that, but change their own oil and adjust their own valves, their little heads would explode. Not that most of them couldn't do it with the proper training, It's simply not what they're used to.

Re:Not recommended?!?!?

[RandoX]

Yeah, because there are so many great open source games out there.

The articles were pretty good

[El Cubano]

The first article is a good one at which to point someone who has never heard of Open Source. My only beef is that the explanation of "What is Open Source" sounds more like a description of "What is the GPL/LGPL." Don't get me wrong, I like the GPL and release all of my work under it when possible, but there are plenty more licenses.

I also think that while OSS has some shortcomings, the way he paints them in third article is a bit bleak. Ha talks about the lack of a gentle learning curve or how they may not be as complete as their commercial conterparts. However, he completely overlooks those applications that have equalled or surpassed their commercial counterparts (like Apache, OpenOffice, Mozilla, and so on). Besides, most new users would be more likely to use OSS applications that have large active communitities (i.e., available support from other users), rather than the less well known.

Re:The articles were pretty good

[Sorce]

He makes a point that I think is often dismissed by a lot of pro open source people. Many of the programs do have a harder learning curve or require computer knowledge or reading of the manual to setup and use. The people that use these programs typically know what they are doing so these aren't major hurdles or something they can't handle. A lot of regular users however just want to push a button and have it go. I think a lot of OSS applications are designed by technical people for technical people. In order to gain more users they are going to have to look at their interfaces and setups from another point of view.

A good example would be windows xp. The first thing I do with a new install is disable all the "new helpful features" because I can operate better/faster without windows holding my hand through everything. For a lot of users all those wizards are extremely helpful. It keeps them from even seeing files that they shouldn't mess with and just works 99% of the time out of the box.

A lot of problems users have with OSS wouldn't be there if they just RTFM, but they wont. It seems to be the view of a lot of technical people that the non technical people should at least give some effort and try to help themselves. Microsoft has taken the other stand and recognizes a lot of people are idiots but they can answer simple questions and will gravitate towards the handholding programs.

Not all OSS has problems because of this but a lot of programs do. I use whatever works the best for my needs and don't have a problem doing some reasearch or figuring it out. I'm in the minority of a lot of computer users out there.

Re:The articles were pretty good

[jim_v2000]

However, he completely overlooks those applications that have equalled or surpassed their commercial counterparts (like Apache, OpenOffice, Mozilla, and so on).

That depends on your definition of surpassed. If you mean more features/stability...yes. If you mean easier and more intuitive to use...maybe not.

Open Source and free books

[CSHARP123]

No doubt educating people is the first step. When Not many businesses know about advantages of linux. These kind of books/articles should help them. I think to promote the use of linux, the commercial companies like RedHat, Novell, IBM should make these books/articles available for free. They should setup seminars for users to understand that there is an alternative OS and it is easy to use and gives more advantages than the MS Windows. This should give them more business in the long term.

Re:Open Source and free books

[i.r.id10t]

There are a few free "animal books" (O'Rieley sp?) available, and quite a bit more documentation of varying degrees of quality and style out on that intarweb thingie. (Creation of good clear docs that actually help you use/install/configure the program is one of the big thing non-coders can do for OSS).

But printing an actual dead tree version will cost lots of money, and typically be out of date by the time it actually arrives in a user's hands.

Re:Open Source and free books

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod Parent up. I agree this is exactly the commercial companies should do in order to promote Linux

Opensource list

[xtrvd]

I don't remember how I got this list, but I think I picked it up on a slashdot post a while ago. Here's a list that I generally use to give people new to Linux wondering what software to use.

My thanks go out to the original poster whom I cannot remember.

1. Web Browsing? Mozilla/Firefox
2. E-mail? Thunderbird or Evolution
3. Group Calendaring? Mozilla Sunbird + Apache/SSL/WebDAV + iCal
4. Audio CD Archiving? Grip + Ogg Vorbis
5. Advanced Media Player? Xine or MPlayer
6. Audio Streaming of Archived CDs? Icecast + Ices
7. Recording of online streams for archival purposes? ALSA + ALSA Utils + Ogg Vorbis + Any required media player format in Xine or MPlayer
8. Firewall? Linux Kernel + iptables
9. Office Functionality? OpenOffice.org
10. Digital Image Editing? GIMP
11. IM Client? GAIM
12. IM Server? Jabberd
13. File sharing? NFS
14. Sane storage management? LVM
15. File compression? BZip2, GZip, or 7Zip also File Roller if you really need a GUI
16. Digital Photo Management? Gthumb or Nautilus
17. PVR? Mythtv.org
18. Video streaming? VLC (Video LAN Client)
19. X10 Home Automation? Bottlerocket
20. Remote desktop/application serving? VNC 4
21. Remote assistance? x0vncserver or the vnc extension for Xorg
22. VPN/Tunneling? OpenVPN or OpenSSH with TCP port forwarding
23. Web Serving? Apache
24. Mail Serving? Courier
25. Server Based Spam Filtering? ASSP
26. Client Based Spam Filtering? Thunderbird
27. Image Scanning? SANE
28. Audio Editing? Rezound or Audacity
29. Multitrack Audio? Ardour
30. MIDI Sequencing? Rosegarden
31. CD Burning (Data and Audio)? cdrecord + various GUI frontends
32. Simple PC Based Puzzle Games? Too many to list from both the GNOME and KDE projects
33. SpyWare/Malware Prevention Removal? None at this point since I don't use the internet via Windows

-Jesse

Re:Opensource list

[js3]

what did scarface hate the most?

I use apps because they are good, not because the man told me to. I'll buy a commercial app if it does what I want and I'll use an opensource one if it's better and free. Choice is good

Re:Opensource list

[Anonymous Coward]

"File sharing? NFS"

I'd say OpenSSH. You can tunnel a lot of things through it and only have one port to "guard". And with Gnome/KDE you can get GUI access to file transfers through their file mangers. Plus you can communicate with OS X and Windblows too with it (assuming Windblows has ssh installed).

Re:Opensource list

[Intron]

Also nothing wrong with Samba for filesharing; plus it does printer sharing.

Re:Opensource list

[Anonymous Coward]

ive used sshwindows before and it really not that great. windows wasnt designed with the idea of remote control via a console. for one NO text editors work via ssh or telnet. im not going to write everything with echo and perl thats just insane

Re:Opensource list

[SpooForBrains]

Yes, but performance-wise, NFS kicks SSH in the nads - as you'd expect, really, since SSH has to encrypt everything. If you've ever tried to copy over that 11GB bzip2 of your home directory before an upgrade you'll know this already :)

Re:Opensource list

[Sithgunner]

I just add a bit on that list from top of my head.
Although I think the listed app goes beyond what the so called 'average pc user' wants, but there goes...

1. Konqueror ( http://www.konqueror.org/ )

2. Email - Sylpheed ( http://sylpheed.good-day.net/ )

3. I think Evolution is more like in this place.

4. Lately "Sound Juicer" is taking more attention too

5. VideoLAN aka VLC ( http://www.videolan.org/ ) and Ogle ( http://www.dtek.chalmers.se/groups/dvd/ ) [and Goggles ( http://www.fifthplanet.net/goggles.html ) for Ogle GUI wrapper] for DVD watching.

6. There are plenty way to do this, but the typical ones could be 'Jinzora' ( http://www.jinzora.org/ ) and 'MusicPD' ( http://www.mpd.org/ ), even plain Apache does it fine too, in a way.

8. If you want easier to manage iptables wrapper, Shorewall ( http://www.shorewall.net/ ) and there are other wrappers too.

9. KOffice ( http://www.koffice.org/ ) and by individual components, Abiword ( http://www.abisource.com/ ), Gnumeric ( http://www.gnome.org/projects/gnumeric/ ), Gnucash ( http://www.gnucash.org/ )

10. Inkscape ( http://www.inkscape.org/ ) or Sodipodi ( http://www.sodipodi.com/ ) for vector graphics.

11. Miranda ( http://miranda-im.org/ ). Windows only.

13. Hmm , Samba? ( http://www.samba.org/ ), WedDAV (Look parent post), FTP (plenty ftp daemons, ex : http://www.proftpd.org/, http://vsftpd.beasts.org/ etc)

16. GPhoto ( http://www.gphoto.org/ ), EOG ( http://www.gnome.org/ ? ), GQView ( http://gqview.sourceforge.net/ ). The latters are for just viewing mainly.

20. FreeNX ( http://www.nomachine.com/ , http://freenx.berlios.de/ ) http://www.poptop.org/ ), L2TPd ( http://sourceforge.net/projects/l2tpd ), RP-L2TPd ( http://sourceforge.net/projects/rp-l2tp/ )

24. Postfix ( http://www.postfix.org/ ), Sendmail ( http://www.sendmail.org/ ), Exim ( http://www.exim.org/ ), Cyrus ( http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/imapd/ ), Xmail ( http://www.xmailserver.org/ ), qmail ( http://www.qmail.org/ )

25. Spamassassin ( http://spamassassin.apache.org/ )

26. Same as above.

27. XSane ( http://www.xsane.org/ ) for sane frontends.

30. Buzzmachines ( http://www.buzzmachines.com/ ) I could be wrong...

31. 'various GUI frontends' - X CD Roast ( http://www.xcdroast.org/ ), K3B ( http://k3b.sourceforge.net/ )

32. Don't know any opensource ones...

Re:Opensource list

[Sithgunner]

Some corrections...

---

Sound Juicer ( http://www.burtonini.com/blog/computers/sound-juic er )

---

MusicPD ( http://www.musicpd.org/ )

---

Something went wrong after freenx.berlios.de...

http://freenx.berlios.de/ ) - Well made remote desktop solution, but no server for Windows atm.

21. Both PPTP and LT2P/Ipsec ones exist. Poptop ( http://www.poptop.org/ ) ...

Re:Opensource list

[Sithgunner]

And of course, OpenCD ( http://www.theopencd.org/ ) makes it a good compilation of open source softwares too.

Re:Opensource list

[online-shopper]

on a LAN, only reason really to use samba is if you have windows boxen. Cups is a much better print server.

Re:Opensource list

[Brandybuck]

Except that OpenSSH isn't a filesystem. KDE (and GNOME) may present it to you as a filesystem, but it isn't. It's great for securely transfering stuff back and forth (sftp), but it doesn't hold a candle to NFS.

Re:Opensource list

[belmolis]

Of course, for the hard core some choices would be different:

• 2. E-mail? /bin/mail
• 7. Recording of online streams for archival purposes? FLAC - real men don't use lossy compression
• 9. Office Functionality? emacs and TeX, gnumeric

Re:Opensource list

[confidential]

I'm pretty late to the story, but I made a similar list awhile ago... I've turned it into a CD of utilities that I update every so often when I'm bored. I require everything to be free (or at least, not required to pay, such as in the case with KPF), with a preference toward F/OSS

-----------------------

Included:
WindowsXP SP2* - Service Pack[1]
Kerio PF 4.2.0* - Firewall
AVG Antivirus 7* - Antivirus[2]
Windows Update* - Windows Updates
Google Toolbar* - Popup Blocker
Firefox 1.0.6* - Web Browser
Folding@Home 5.02 - Help Cure Cancer
iTunes 4.9 - Music Jukebox
iPod 2005-06-26 - iPod Drivers
VLC 0.8.2 - Media Player
Skype 1.3.0.57 - VoIP IM client
Shareaza 2.1.0.0 - Gnutella P2P
Azureus - BitTorrent P2P
        Java 1.5.0.04 - Java Environment
        Azureus 2.3.0.4 - Client
        SafePeer 2.5.1 - BlackList
Picasa 2.0 - Photo Organizer
7-zip 4.23 - File Compression
Acrobat Reader 7.0 - PDF viewer
DeepBurner 1.6 - Nero-like Burner
FileZilla 2.2.14b - FTP Client
Thunderbird 1.0.6 - Mail/News Client
OpenOffice.org 1.1.4 - Office Suite
nvu 1.0 - WYSIWYG Web Editor
GIMP - Image Manipulation
        GTK+ 2.6.8 - Environment
        GIMP 2.2.8 - Editor
        GIMP-help 2.0.8 - Help Files
        GIMP-anim 2.0.2 - Animation
Inkscape 0.42 - Vector Drawing
pwsafe 2.11 - Password Wallet
PWGen 1.40 - Password Generator
PuTTY 0.57 - SSH Client
Bonjour 1.0 - ZeroConfig Client
AdAware SE 1.06* - Anti-Spyware[3]
SpyBot Search and Destroy 1.4* - Anti-Spyware[4]

Footnotes:

* I /will not/ work on anybody's computer unless they have these programs installed and up to date.

[1] Windows XP SP2 may not install on a pirated version of Windows.

[2] This is the free for personal use edition available at http://www.grisoft.com./ To use it, you must request a free key from http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_dwnl_free.php

[3]/[4] I put both programs in the collection because neither application is 100% perfect. I personally run AdAware once a month or so, and have SpyBot set to download the latest definition and check for problems once per week.

Re:Opensource list

[oojah]

Windows can talk to cups as well.

Re:Opensource list

[myukew]

real men don't use emacs

Re: Opensource list

[gidds]

One more for the list is LilyPond, which is a music engraving (score printing) package.

It's not a drop-in replacement for Sibelius, or the various music packages which do score-printing like Cubase, Finale, etc., because it has no GUI -- it takes in a text file, and writes out a PDF. You get best results by writing the input by hand, but it's not easy (practically a full programming language), although there are converters from ABC, MIDI, and other popular formats (though with mediocre success). I believe it can be driven from RoseGarden, though I don't know how well.

However, it's well worth the effort, because its output is the best going -- much more natural and easier to read than any other engraving software, to the point where you don't mind not being able to tweak the output, drag bars around until it looks right, because LilyPond generally makes it look right itself!

Re:Not recommended?!?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean, custom, business-specific, fully supported 24x7, money-back guarantee if it fails, applications, right?

Custom == written by people who insist on shipping beta code with dozens of faults and insist that it'll take at least 6 months to fix any given one.

Business-specific == About 500% over priced with an all encompassing NDA.

Fully-supported 24x7 == By a group of former telemarketers in God knows what corner of the world who have never used the software.

Money-back guarantee == Have you read your EULA lately?

Microsoft Users Please Move Along

[Skeetskeetskeet]

No pop-ups, pictures, or talking paper clips are included to help explain the big words. I recommend the Idiot's Guide To Open Source, comes complete with a coupon for a reversible lobotomy.

Re:Microsoft Users Please Move Along

[Skeetskeetskeet]

Wow, that and 50 cents will get you a hand job from your dad.... I'm so impressed.. Idiot...Anonymous Coward says it all for you.

Re:Microsoft Users Please Move Along

[Anonymous Coward]

You were impressed enough to prematurely ejaculate that woeful little comeback. Care to try again - waste some more karma maybe?

Re:Microsoft Users Please Move Along

[Skeetskeetskeet]

Care to say it to me in person fatass? Or will mommy let you out of your basement long enough to reply? Maybe you can get your curfew extended long enough to get your ass kicked to the ground. Hope you can move that 350-plus girth of yours around without chafing your little pecker off.

Re:Microsoft Users Please Move Along

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see:

* Hollow threats of physical violence? Check. The hallmark of a small mind attempting to appear big on the internet. Great start, dickhead.

* Non sequitur insults? Check. You've got nothing to bring to the table, so don't try to fake it by making shit up. "You're so fat" is about as cutting as "Like your momma". Next time, just run away and suck it down like a good little bitch.

* Not even smart enough to reply to my post? Check. Jesus christ - are you twelve or something? You've been replying to your own posts you fucking idiot.

All I can say is enjoy your bad karma bitch. At least now people reading slashdot can filter out your bullshit unfunny one liners. Look at your post history - only trolls (i.e. me) have replied to you. The rest of the time you pretty much get ignored. Surprising? Not really.

Minor beef

[antonymous]

Well, I guess it's just another series of "starter" articles regarding open source. My main beef with the articles is that none of them compare Windows with Linux very directly. Are most of the people reading this article aware of the copious amounts of spyware/adware their machine is riddled with (security issues)? How about the fact that my P2 400 MHZ computer works great under Linux and could barely chug along with Win2k (i.e. don't worry about buying a new computer every time a new version of Windows comes out)? And I don't care if Yahoo wants to play favorites with certain distros, but can they please explain what a Live CD is and link to Knoppix or Ubuntu?

Yes, I do realize they're not in the business of OSS advocacy, but it would be so easy for the author to engage the average computer user (i.e. "get your pale-faced neighbor to burn you this Live Linux CD - it will NOT change the rest of your computer in any way")

Re:Minor beef

[GlassHeart]

How about the fact that my P2 400 MHZ computer works great under Linux and could barely chug along with Win2k (i.e. don't worry about buying a new computer every time a new version of Windows comes out)?

Your comment also needs to be tempered. I still own a 350MHz K6, and it runs Windows 2000 about as well as it runs KDE - that is, not all that well. I remember my 8MB 66MHz 80486 laptop running Win98 and Word competently enough, but barely able to run X by itself, nevermind OpenOffice.

Point is, to a certain extent, a computer is stuck with its contemporary software. Linux is certainly more usable with more recent software, but the difference is not night and day. What does your 400 MHz P2 actually run when you say "Linux"? I very much doubt that OpenOffice "works great" on that box.

Another point is that many software have plateaued in terms of CPU demands. Nobody desperately needs Word or Excel or IE to run much faster, and what may be true of your 200MHz P2 is not necessarily applicable to a 1GHz Celeron. Other than rendering video, which I do once in a while, I basically don't need much more raw performance out of my 733MHz G4 running Tiger.

Re:Minor beef

[ImaLamer]

"get your pale-faced neighbor to burn you this Live Linux CD - it will NOT change the rest of your computer in any way"

That's funny because I've tried for years to get a buddy to run Knoppix on an old PC he's got and he'll never do it. Even though he knows I have a computer/networking related degree he doesn't believe that Knoppix won't affect his Windows install (which is very broken).

I was going to type "I don't know why he doesn't believe me..." but then I think about all of the Windows software that destroys systems without user intervention and realize that some people just don't trust software not made by a major companies like Microsoft, Adobe, and their ilk or major game developers.

The sad thing is that if people got over the hump of just trying the (open source) software they'll learn there is a lot less to fear than with it's proprietary counterparts.

Re:Minor beef

[antonymous]

Your comment also needs to be tempered. I still own a 350MHz K6, and it runs Windows 2000 about as well as it runs KDE - that is, not all that well. I remember my 8MB 66MHz 80486 laptop running Win98 and Word competently enough, but barely able to run X by itself, nevermind OpenOffice.

Point is, to a certain extent, a computer is stuck with its contemporary software. Linux is certainly more usable with more recent software, but the difference is not night and day. What does your 400 MHz P2 actually run when you say "Linux"? I very much doubt that OpenOffice "works great" on that box.

My main point is that just because a computer is low-end by today's standards doesn't mean that it can't be just as functional as the day it came out. I am currently running Ubuntu, and yes, I also tried the KDE distro and there was enough of a performance difference to make me go back to GNOME. But to me, the beauty of linux is being able to install a distro that can be functional, and not have to worry about pirating software (like an OS, but also productivity software), checking system requirements, let alone worry about getting any current support. It just works, so why should I go fish for a copy of Windows 98 and go driver hunting?

And while I won't say that OpenOffice, for example, works perfectly (though word processing isn't all that intensive anyway), the fact that it is free productivity software made the decision to switch to linux that much easier for me. I would never purchase Word or Photoshop and expect it to run smoothly on this computer, but the fact that I can tinker around in GIMP for free makes the choice worth it, along with knowing that I will have updates, bugfixes, etc. And yes, I know that these are both available for Windows (OoO and GIMP), but there are many other great programs that will never have open-source alternatives, unless you completely dive into the open-source arena.

Re:Minor beef

[codemachine]

Actually OO can run fine on older machines. The startup time is rather bad, but it operates just fine. The biggest thing that helps machines like this is a good chunk of RAM. My PIII 733 was starting to hit its limits with the latest distros until I added another 512MB RAM. Now it runs the latest stuff just fine.

If you were a heavy OO user on an older system with sufficient RAM, you could always use the quickstarter or something like that to reduce start times.

Honest approach

[SunPin]

The licensing points seemed pretty useless in an article about what the average PC user cares about--using their PC and not spending money if possible. An honest approach would be, "half the junk on your system is illegal. The other half is monitoring you. Nothing is free so stop taking your little pirate gifts from hackers and take some time to use clean, legal, community software." That wouldn't happen in that publication but the fact that this article even ran is a good sign.

Ubuntu Live CD

[RAMMS EIN]

Also worth mentioning is the Ubuntu Live CD. This CD contains a bootable no-install Ubuntu Linux image, but also contains a number of open-source Windows applications (at least Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice.org IIRC).

They will also send pressed CDs to you for free.

NEWS FLASH....

[webphenom]

The "average" PC user doesn't give a flying fuck about the "Open Source" movement or Linux or whatever.

Actually, the MAJORITY of PC users could absolutely care less about Open Source. I know of two people (they are related) that are open source/Linux advocates. Everyone else I know would be burdened by using non-standard software, whether they pay for it or not.

MOST people feel they don't pay for OS or Office software because it is normally buried in the "buy price" of a new PC. Since the buy price of a new PC is affordable for most people, there is no clear compelling reason to use software that is not supported and can be "forked" into a million different version just "because you can".

Come on, people.

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[hungrygrue]

Well, if they would be "burdened by using non-standard software", then there should be little argument, right? Let's see.... every major operating system except Windows is Unix or *Nix based, once you know the basics of any one, moving between them is easy. Porting applications between them is also much easier than porting to/from the previously mentioned non standard OS. So, you see, it is simple: all you have to do to avoid non standard software is to just not run Windows. Problem solved.

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[Anonymous Coward]

"...there is no clear compelling reason to use software that is not supported..."

Yes there is. To free yourself from the control-freak, lock-in mentality of Windoblows and the likes. And if that is not important to you, then get in line with the rest of the sheep and follow the pipe-piper. Computers and the freedom of the Internet are getting too important for you to be a non-caring consumer anymore. Get involved or surrender what little freedom we have left to the likes of companies like MS.

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[Anonymous Coward]

So you and your little bunch need to be lead around by the nose like cows. That's fine and you'll go to the slaughter like the rest of the mindless cows who have come to love the taste of the bull shit that M$ is dishing out. What you fail to realize is that there are people in the world who actually give a damn.... I know I know it's a shock to you since you obviously fail to grasp the facts that A: You do not and never will speak for the entire computing world, something for which I am very grateful because narrow minded and egotistical twits like you give thinking human beings and the average computer user a bad name. B: just because YOU and YOUR GROUP happen to believe one thing or compute in one way DOES NOT mean that EVERYONE in the rest of civilized society thinks or computes the same way.

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[mrtivo]

It is "could not care less" not "could care less" since that implies you actually can care less. :)

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[Anonymous Coward]

They give a flying fuck when they go to replace that PC with one of the new $300-$600 models that is barebones...then, they get pissed when they find out they can't install their old software on their new PC. They are ready for Open Source when they realize it'll cost them $800 to replace the shit they used on the first PC. I see this all of the time.

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[ImaLamer]

They are ready for Open Source when they realize it'll cost them $800 to replace the shit they used on the first PC. I see this all of the time.

I actually converted two people to Linux this way. My favorite of the two had a computer breakdown and needed a bunch of replacement parts (HDD controller, power supply, a new HDD, which I had laying around). It was a Windows 98 computer and I refused to re-install it, which was fine because they wanted XP or 2000 because that is what they saw at work so much. When I told them that a new copy of XP is over 1/3 of the price of a new computer they thought they pretty much were fucked (I'm basing that 1/3 number on a new Compaq with monitor at Sam's Club that can be had for a cool $599). There was no way that they were going to shell out $200 bucks for software they always thought was free.

Long story short, I showed up the next day with Mandrake (this was shortly before "Mandriva") with *all* of the packages installed. Of course they "got it" being familiar with Windows and was using OpenOffice and browsing the web right away. Now they are what we'd call a less-than-average PC user, a n00b, but there was less of learning curve since they have always been learning as they went along. They asked me if they were going to get into trouble because they had all of this software that they didn't pay for - how cute?

And imagine, someone actually tried talking them into shelling out that $200 for a new copy of Windows. Someone else told them that they could get a copy of XP for free, but looking at how many times it needs to be patched - and how MS is protecting those patches I'm glad I talked them out of it.

So yes, hard drive failures are a quick and easy way to get someone turned onto free software. Free as in speech doesn't matter to them, but free as in beer always appeals to the inner cheapskate. As my dad would say "Free software? That is the best kind!"

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[at_slashdot]

I find it funny when an average guy clams to know what the "average" PC user needs, wants or thinks.

I only know what I need:
1. cheap or free: 1-0 for "Open Source"
2. software without viruses or adware: 2-0 for "Open Source"
3. good technology: 3-0 for "Open Source"
4. good community: 4-0 for "Open Source"
5. freedom to inspect and modify the code: 5-0 for "Open Source"

I don't care about the name, I do care about the points above. Let's say that the "average" user doesn't care about the no. 5 but I'm pretty sure it will if he realize that 1 through 4 are related to point no. 5

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[Sithgunner]

This is rather off topic but your statement against pc being affordable by majority of people is utterly wrong. I think it's right if you're only considering first world countries... but not so for the rest of the world. Maybe a little read about China's situation give some clue on it, which holds 1/5 of the whole earth population.

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[Kjella]

1. cheap or free: 1-0 for "Open Source"
2. software without viruses or adware: 2-0 for "Open Source"
3. good technology: 3-0 for "Open Source"
4. good community: 4-0 for "Open Source"
5. freedom to inspect and modify the code: 5-0 for "Open Source"

I don't care about the name, I do care about the points above. Let's say that the "average" user doesn't care about the no. 5 but I'm pretty sure it will if he realize that 1 through 4 are related to point no. 5

1. cheap or free = so is pirated, and so "is" the baked in OS/Office when they buy it (or at the very least, a sunk cost)
2. software without viruses or adware = the average user doesn't realize the difference between "free" as in OSS apps and "free" as in ad/spy/malware apps
3. good technology = incompatible software that the average tech friend can't help them with
4. good community = my impression is that the average user doesn't use a community at all, and will ask someone to "fix it" for them.

In fact, it's my impression that average users simply stay with what they have. For their limited use, the "investment/gain" ratio is so low because they have to learn a whole new system. That might be cool for those of that spend half the evening in front of the computer, not for those that spend half an hour surfing, writing mail, a few documents and otherwise use it like an mp3 player.

Kjella

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[ookaze]

The "average" PC user doesn't give a flying fuck about the "Open Source" movement or Linux or whatever.

You forgot to say he does not guve a flying fuck about "Windows" too. The average users sees the computer, sometimes Word, sometimes Excel. Actually, most average users using these software at home only see Office, because that's what they bought for an expensive price, or got from their company, and asked some geek to install, or shelled more bucks to make someone else install it.

Everyone else I know would be burdened by using non-standard software, whether they pay for it or not.

Everyone else I know IS burdened by using ANY software they have no formation for, whether they pay or not.
All the people I switch to Linux actually accepted the switch the day I stopped supporting their Windows. And I told them there is plenty of paid support for Windows. Guess what, they preferred the switch, especially when less than a month after that, all the Windows machines I stopped supporting fubared. Even the one who I thought found support elsewhere contacted me last week to ask me about computer parts (he's going to buy a new machine), because his computer was completely dead (actually, from the symptoms, only his Windows is dead, but I won't tell him a thing about that, no more Windows support).

MOST people feel they don't pay for OS or Office software because it is normally buried in the "buy price" of a new PC.

MS Office sure is not.

Since the buy price of a new PC is affordable for most people, there is no clear compelling reason to use software that is not supported and can be "forked" into a million different version just "because you can".

These are not the reasons to use these softwares. They actually work the way they should, that's the primary reason.

Re:NEWS FLASH....

[at_slashdot]

"n fact, it's my impression that average users simply stay with what they have"

I totally agree with this observation. Switching from one OS to another is not something that most of the people like or are willing to do. Actually that the basis of MS monopoly. However, many people, there are now millions, swiched to Linux -- I guess that shows something, probably people frustration with Windows or with Microsoft actions.

SCO

[RAMMS EIN]

``Such licenses have even gone on to inspire projects like OpenCola and OpenBeer, which share their secret formulas with the world''

Would that be like SCO? First, you share your "secret". Then, you turn around and sue people for stealing it from you. Then, you manage to avoid bankrupcy for an astonishingly long time, meanwhile sending more and more money your lawyer friends' way. Then, they buy you a beer. Or whatever.

Re:Not recommended?!?!?

[pete6677]

Who sells those? Do they even exist? I've certainly never seen or heard of software with a non-gimmick money back guarantee.

Canard

[RentonSentinel]

I'm sorry to violate orthodoxy but,

The average user does not care about open source. They care about FREEWARE.

Thats not to say I don't care about open source... its just not as compelling to Joe Sixpack.

Re:Canard

[erikharrison]

While true, you beg the question

They do not care because they do not know. That's no good reason to criticize a series of articles that tries to the get the word out

Average users don't want to care about how their car works either. But they still know to get their oil changed every month, and have opinions on issues like the classification of SUVs.

Re:Canard

[legirons]

"The average user does not care about open source. They care about FREEWARE."

5-10 years ago, you'd have been right. When Winamp was the latest invention, when pkzip was common, when Netscape being free was still a novelty, people wanted freeware.

But since then, the split happened. Freeware authors went into one of two camps:
(a) Those who decided they weren't getting enough money, became paraniod, experimented with copy-protected shareware, but finally became neurotic enough to invent adware, spyware, and later, viruses.
(b) Those who thought group (a) were misguided and wanted to continue offering stuff for free. These people became Free Software authors.

The general public know this. They know that the WinAmp author got assimilated into AOL and spat out. They know that GetRight is spyware now. They know that Napster got bought, killed, and eventually became an undead version of HMV.com.

They've seen all this in the news, and freeware doesn't exist anymore. Authors with morals now label their wares as Free Software for fear of it being used against them for evil. Authors in in for the money became blubbering lunatics, trying ever more severe ways to "get back" at the users who didn't pay them.

And the users' reaction to all this? "If it's not GPL, it's not safe" seems to be one of the most practical ways to evaluate 'free' software...

Re:Canard

[Anonymous Coward]

... and if its GPL, its probably safe...

Re:Canard

[Sixpack, Joe]

Dear Sir,

I find this open source you speak of compelling and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Is it FREE?

Re:Canard

[typical]

And the users' reaction to all this? "If it's not GPL, it's not safe" seems to be one of the most practical ways to evaluate 'free' software...

This may be true, and I do use GNU software like mad...but honestly, that is a really sad state of affairs.

Re:Canard

[extrasolar]

Great post, I think you hit it spot on, but of course not all freeware authors who are in it for the money are lunatics, so I'll interpret that expression as an elegant use of hyperbole. But sometimes I wonder how much the author of mIRC has gotten for his program?

fallacy

[kebes]

For those who want simplicity and reliability, commercial packages may be your best bet - at least for day-to-day work. But if you're willing to experiment a little, and put up with some technical challenges, there is a wealth of programming - for free - in the open source community.

This is a fallacy. Alot of OSS is developmental and experimental and truly is buggy. Some OSS is top-quality and fully useable (linux, firefox, gimp, etc.). It is a fallacy to believe that commercial software is somehow better. Some commercial software is fully useable (photoshop, MS Office, etc.) but there is alot of commercial software that is absolutely crap. Even software made by respectable companies will often present 'technical challenges' (for instance, software bundled with hardware devices, etc.). With commercial software, the price may give you a hint as to quality... but ultimately you have to do some research and try to make an informed decision about what to buy. With OSS, you again have to do some research before deciding what to use (although you have the bonus advantage of being able to quickly install all of the choices without any financial commitment).

I don't think commercial software is automatically simpler and more reliable. The great number of OSS options is admitedly complicated, but it is silly to think that just because something costs money, it must be better than the free alternative.

Re:fallacy

[arkanes]

Honestly, with a few exceptions my experience has been that the usability, stability, and reliability of a program is inverse proportion to the price. Once you remove the spyware laden crap from the picture (and granted that the average non-computer literate person doesn't have the knowledge or experience to jump over these options), the best Windows software out there is mostly OSS, Freeware, or low-cost shareware. The *worst* applications I have ever used on Windows have been incredibly expensive commercial applications (5 figure per seat licensing, that sort of thing). Not even the horror of Gtk-Win32 is that bad.

Commercial software on Unix is even worse (amazingly).

Re:fallacy

[wxyze]

I don't think commercial software is automatically simpler and more reliable. The great number of OSS options is admitedly complicated, but it is silly to think that just because something costs money, it must be better than the free alternative.

Its not that commercial software is automatically or must be better than OSS, its that it usually is.

I'll never go back to Windows (for all the usual reasons), but I've been using Linux (Mandrake, RH, SuSE) as my primary desktop for five years, and I've finally had enough. There are some gems in OSS, but overall I'm tired of my computing system being so buggy. These are 1995 problems that I'm having in 2005. Hacking is fun when you're creating something new, but it gets old real fast when you're fixing things that shouldn't be broken.

I've just switched to OSX, and except for the price tag, its got the best of all worlds. It just works(TM).

Re:fallacy

[legirons]

"Alot of OSS is developmental and experimental and truly is buggy."

Have you seen commercial software?

Darwin works in both camps -- there's a reason why most of sourceforge is crap, and there's a reason that most commercial software is crap. If you take the best examples of each (for example, the GNUWin2 CD, versus the commercial software that actually gets published), then the results look a lot more polished.

Almost the right idea...

[nlawalker]

This is a push in the right direction, but it isn't quite there.

It's fairly trivial to do something that can help educate the average PC user about OSS, as we can see from this article. The challenge is getting them to care.

I believe OSS suffers from "Apple Advertising Syndrome." I've heard it said before that if Apple actually ran advertisements that showed a Mac and PC working side by side, saying "Watch as this Mac does exactly what this PC does, but it's faster, more usable, and easier to look at, and you can get MS Office, email, calendaring, IM, etc." they'd sell a lot more. OSS needs the same sort of thing, but they need to tout that great "Free" price tag. MS Office vs. OpenOffice is a great example. The only reason the average PC user would even consider leaving something like MS Office for OpenOffice is that it could do exactly the same thing, but cheaper or for free. Period. I don't personally know a single person that uses OpenOffice instead of MS Office, and it's all because of network externality. Is my copy of Office busted? I'm sure someone can help me fix it. I am sure that if I just click "Save," everyone else will be able to see this document, because everyone uses MS Office. No worries. The only way network externality can be defeated is with something incredibly tempting and convincing, and no amount of usability or features pumped into an application will make it one millionth of one percent as tempting as saying "Hey, it works just like MS Office but it's free!"

The average PC user doesn't care about "Free as in freedom, not free as in beer." Free as in beer is what will get the software out there.

I guess the most unfortunate part is that increasing recognition of OSS to "average PC users" won't add a single person to those contributing to the source. Average PC users consume, not produce, applications.

Re:Almost the right idea...

[darksider415]

I agree with everything you're saying. Of course, I'm not the average PC user, but I see the point. I do some editing for my friends, and they don't realise that just because they use Office, doesn't mean that I use Office. Then again, I use OpenOffice and I have to deal with all the formatting issues going from Office to OpenOffice. That's off topic, though. Freedom is important, for all of us. If we let Microsoft have their way, we're doomed. Fight the power, take up the hatchet and let us go Open Source, even if it only means switching from Internet Exploder to Firefox. Maybe, we can even get to the stage where carrying a bootable *nix disk becomes standard practice. DS415 out. *unleashes an army of penguins on the old copy of Windoze XP lying around*

Re:Almost the right idea...

[westlake]

The only reason the average PC user would even consider leaving something like MS Office for OpenOffice is that it could do exactly the same thing, but cheaper or for free.

"Free-as-in-beer" is overrated.

How much does the average user spend on consumables, ink and paper, over three months, six months, a year? How much is he really paying for Office? Not retail list, surely.

Student-Teacher Office sells for about $150 with a three seat license.

Re:Almost the right idea...

[ookaze]

I don't personally know a single person that uses OpenOffice instead of MS Office, and it's all because of network externality. Is my copy of Office busted? I'm sure someone can help me fix it.

I'm not so sure. Every average user I've seen in this situation reinstalls everything, hoping to fix the issue.

I am sure that if I just click "Save," everyone else will be able to see this document, because everyone uses MS Office.

Which is of course false, as any regular user of MS Office knows. One of the problems is the over simplification like these. What you described is the expected behaviour, not the real one. Sure enough Office 97 users could not read Office 2000 documents if these Office 2000 users just clicked "Save". Worse, the Office 2000 will bug the user everytime to convert the Office 97 document ... The formatting will often be broken too.

The average PC user doesn't care about "Free as in freedom, not free as in beer." Free as in beer is what will get the software out there.

Wrong, he does not know about it. Once you stop providing and installing warez to them, they will pretty soon get it.

I guess the most unfortunate part is that increasing recognition of OSS to "average PC users" won't add a single person to those contributing to the source. Average PC users consume, not produce, applications.

That's not the goal. The goal is to acquire critical mass for drivers and some proprietary apps.
The fact is that too much average users thinking thay are elite users try to force their (often wrong) opinion on OSS developers.

If only they knew the $$$$

[MattPF]

If only our aunts, uncles, grandparents, brothers, sisters, knew how much money they could save by equipping their new commodity PC's with open source:
http://www.farleyfamily.net/articles/freesoftware/

Re:If only they knew the $$$$

[TheOtherAgentM]

I see a problem with that list. Yes, Linux is a free operating system, but then the list says Windows Movie Maker is free video editing software. I love that software, and I didn't pay for it directly. It runs on Windows ME and XP. Most of the applications that follow run on Windows. That's going to confuse people when they think they can run everything on the list for free.

What is source code?

[gr8_phk]

As a programmer, I know what it is. The Yahoo article makes the same mistake so many do: it assumes the reader know what the heck "source" or "source code" is. Lay people do not know what source code is. They might be interested is "Open Source" if they knew what it is. Saying that it's when programmers share "source code" is still meaningless unless you know that source code is the actual instructions people type in to create a program. The public needs this little tidbit of information to comprehend OSS. Perhaps with the extra mention that a program (compiler) then munches this and spits out an executable (er exe file). Free Software? They get "free beer", but the freedom aspect makes no sense without understanding what source code is.

I may be underestimating the public, but I honestly don't think the masses know what you're talking about when you write an article and assume the reader knows what "source code" is.

Re:What is source code?

[bmalia]

And if the person writting the article doesn't know what it is, we get great quotes like: "Letters demanding US$5000 for use of the Linux name were originally dismissed as a hoax. But according to the Sydney Morning Herald, the Open Sauce king is dead serious."

Re:What is source code?

[Anonymous Coward]

Free Software? They get "free beer", but the freedom aspect makes no sense without understanding what source code is.

Sure it does! They get the freedom to copy the stuff for their friends without breaking any laws and can also use it for whatever they want to.

To a certain extent people can also understand the freedom to study how a program works, although understanding what source is enhances this ability considerably.

Re:What is source code?

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh huh. Keep reading and you'll learn about The Vole, Mozzarella Fireferret, AMD's Sempr0n, and Intel's new marchitecture!

Here's a link

[Aggrajag]

I've found great stuff from here, not necessarily open source though.

http://searchlores.org/bangla.htm

And of course, the Pricelessware.

http://www.pricelessware.org/

Re:Here's a link

[Anonymous Coward]

nice advert for your clickthrough butt munch

Re:Here's a link

[Aggrajag]

wtf?

fallacy number two

[Anonymous Coward]

The articles and your post portray the choice as being between Open Source vs. Commercial Software, but isn't it really Open Source vs. Closed Source? Plenty of Linux distros are commercial products, run by for-profit companies. Alternately, Open Source apps are bundled with paid services, again, for profit.

We ought to make the effort to reinforce that it's Open Source vs. Closed Source. I'm not willing to give up the ground of commercial success for Open Source products just because some journalist is too lazy to use the proper terminology.

My usual response

[Spy der Mann]

"How much does it cost?"
It doesn't, it's free.
"Oh, does it have spyware or something?"
No, it's open source.
"Open source? What's that?"
It means they give away the source code, you can modify it and make your own.
"Hey dude, that's sweet!"
Yup!

Re:My usual response

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the 2nd to the last line should read: "Uhh yeah that's cool (I guess)... so does that mean it can get on the Internet?"

Your *AVERAGE* PC User could give a shit about anything else.

Re:My usual response

[RentonSentinel]

I disagree... what is the difference between a car with open source software in the AM/FM stereo and a car with FREE software in the AM/FM stereo?

"Hey dude, who cares? I don't go inside the stereo anyway." is the likely response...

Re:My usual response

[dsci]

"Hey dude, who cares? I don't go inside the stereo anyway." is the likely response... You are missing the whole point of Open Source. To try to stick with your AM/FM analogy, imagine you wanted to add a new IF stage to the AM receiver and SELL the new product to AM buffs.

If it's Open Source, you can.

For businesses, this customization aspect is very, very important. Well, unless they want to get into vendor lock-in, endless upgrades, etc, etc.

In the end, though, it's about choice. Your choice to PICK with AM radio you have in your car, or what OS/software I run on my computers.

Re:My usual response

[RentonSentinel]

I agree... the customization factor is pimp... but Joe Sixpack can't pull it off. Its not an easy customization, its a deep internal one. Therefore, not a mainstream one.

Re:My usual response

[westlake]

"Open source? What's that?" It means they give away the source code, you can modify it and make your own. "Hey dude, that's sweet!" Yup!

To anyone but a programmer source is no more readable than a Sumerian clay tablet.

Re:My usual response

[spisska]

Joe Sixpack can rebuild a carburator with his eyes closed. It's little Joey Jr that will be customizing the radio.

Re:My usual response

[typical]

"Hey dude, who cares? I don't go inside the stereo anyway." is the likely response...

But many other people *do*, and tend to fix the same things that irritate you, because those things irritate *them*.

Open Source licences are a good charm to ward off companies "being evil".

Not extensive, but here's a start....

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a few "Good" open source games. There are quite a few others out there. Sure, there may not be UberLeetHardcoreGamerOrgyOfTheMonth, but there are high quality ones out there if you look, plus Opensource ports of many classic games (not listed)

Planet Penguin Racing- http://projects.planetpenguin.de/
FlightGear- http://www.flightgear.org/
Armagetron - http://armagetron.sourceforge.net/
Vega Strike (see also the WC Privateer remake)- http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/
Frozen Bubble-
      http://www.frozen-bubble.org/
      Live java version- http://glenn.sanson.free.fr/fb/play.html

Quake 3 - http://liberatedgames.org/game.php?game_id=90
Scorched3D - http://www.scorched3d.co.uk/
ChromiumBSU - http://www.reptilelabour.com/software/chromium/

This is just what I could think of in a few minutes- There is a really great 3d Nascar style game on the Suse 9.2 DVD, but I can't remember it's name while I'm at work.

Re:Not extensive, but here's a start....

[Intron]

Pingus - it just needs some level designers.

Re:Not extensive, but here's a start....

[Anonymous Coward]

Ach!
I can't belive I forgot Pingus!

BTW- the racing game is Torcs- http://torcs.sourceforge.net/

Re:Not extensive, but here's a start....

[typical]

There aren't many Wal-Mart-shelf style open source games out there for a couple of reasons:

1) Most of the effort in developing such games comes from producing content (audio, artwork, models, etc). There aren't lots of people producing this in the OSS world.

2) Most current closed source games have very minimal replay value -- a good deal of the enjoyment comes from one-off events, like watching animations in the game, or plot twists. People that write open source software almost universally are writing something that they themselves can use. Since game elements that only work once or a few times (animations, etc) don't enhance their enjoyment of the game much, they don't happen.

As a result, you find many games in the "a lifetime to master" sort of class. Most of these have minimal graphics and art content, gameplay that either relies on randomly-generated gameplay/levels or human competition (to keep the game fun for the authors as well).

If you look at some of the open source games that diverge from the conventional closed-source world, you will find games of a sort that you cannot find elsewhere, and in many ways are much stronger than their closed-source brethren.

*) Text-based interactive fiction. TADS or one of the many other interactive fiction systems provide years of plotlines that are deeper, richer, and better-written than commercial games out there. There is a learning curve to get into text-based interactive fiction -- once you're over it, you have a vast, excellent library of games available to you.

*) Rogue/Moria/Angband/Nethack games. There is a whole genre of "dungeon crawler" games like this. They traditionally have limited graphics or just text (though there are exceptions, such as Falcon's Eye and Egoboo). If you have played Diablo or the console versions of the Baldur's Gate games, you've played a game inspired by these (but with far more simplistic gameplay, if more graphics). Dungeon crawlers involve you moving a character deeper and deeper into increasingly dangerous dungeons underground. Most levels are randomly generated, so that each play is different. In general, there are two families of dungeon crawlers -- Nethack, which is in the "sit down and play a quick game" category, and Moria, which is in the "a single game may last for a week and you probably still won't win" category. Nethack, which has many years of people hacking on and improving and extending the game code, is mostly oriented towards figuring out the staggering number of interactions between game elements. A few examples: if it's a full moon outside in real life, werecreatures in the game will be affected. And then there's the Kosiak example:

"Eat a floating eye corpse and you'll get ESP, which will allow you to see enemies anywhere on the map, but only while blinded. To take advantage of it, you may want to drink a potion of blindness, or preferably, find and wear a blindfold. Of course, while blindfolded, even with ESP you won't be able to see inanimate objects on the floor--when you find piles of items, your character will have to "feel" for them. Oh, and you won't be able to read scrolls. Whoops! In that pile of items you just felt is a cockatrice corpse--fortunately you were wearing gloves, otherwise you would've been turned to stone just by touching it. But now, blind and protected, you can pick up the cockatrice corpse and use it to attack monsters--now your enemies will turn to stone when you strike them! Unfortunately, their inventory turns to stone as well. Hey, no problem--you've

Re:Not extensive, but here's a start....

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, not my cup 'o tea, but isn't torcs more than 'a nascar type of game'? I mean, it does let you do more than turn left doesn't it?

Re:Not extensive, but here's a start....

[Luke-Jr]

Armagetron is now Armagetron Advanced - http://armagetronad.net/

Unimaginative

[Anonymous Coward]

"covering nearly every imaginable application: from word processors and e-mail applications to media players and video games."

The OP must have a very limited imagination...

Nit: picked.

[Jooly Rodney]

Liberating the code isn't the point; the point is, the code liberates you.

GIMP, the Un-Photoshop

[Sundroid]

I hope people realize that you can be a Microsoft Windows users and still use most, if not all, of the open-source software mentioned here. To me, the deal-breaker, the must-have, of the open-source software is GIMP. Unless you're a professional graphic artist employed by a company that is willing to buy the $600-a-pop Photoshop for you, GIMP is a perfect alternative. The Windows version of GIMP can be downloaded from http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html. It's a small 11 megabyte download; no reason not to try it.

I've never taken one single computer graphics class in my life and I've managed to learn how to use GIMP and created dozens of graphics for my blog at http://sunandfun.blogspot.com/.

Re:GIMP, the Un-Photoshop

[typical]

I hope people realize that you can be a Microsoft Windows users and still use most, if not all, of the open-source software mentioned here.

While this is true, I have found that Windows releases of cross platform open source packages are almost always slower, often less stable, and sometimes less featureful than their Linux-based counterparts, where often the bulk of the developers live.

I like dia, but I found the cygwin release of dia to be unstable, for instance.

Re:GIMP, the Un-Photoshop

[ookaze]

I hope people realize that you can be a Microsoft Windows users and still use most, if not all, of the open-source software mentioned here.

Actually, it's not a very good choice. It's tedious, and the Windows platform is too limited to use every features of these apps. Most FOSS apps on cygwin are unstable, slow, and heavily degraded compared to when they are used on Linux.

To me, the deal-breaker, the must-have, of the open-source software is GIMP. Unless you're a professional graphic artist employed by a company that is willing to buy the $600-a-pop Photoshop for you, GIMP is a perfect alternative.

And that's especially true of the GIMP. Windows interface just is not usable if you have no MDI, that's why a lot of people complain about the GIMP interface : they use it on Windows, which is too limited to handle it.
Even on Gnome, a windows manager like metacity just started to support some of the requirements for using GIMP 2 efficiently.

I've never taken one single computer graphics class in my life and I've managed to learn how to use GIMP and created dozens of graphics for my blog at http://sunandfun.blogspot.com/.

A lot of free articles and free books have been written to learn to use the GIMP, that's what makes it so good.
Good luck with Photoshop. Does it still come with the learning video ? I could not know, because all the people I know that use Photoshop use warez versions, and have no helpful video. Even worse, these people can only do very basic things with it ...

Re:Not recommended?!?!?

[westlake]

The roads are full of people who have no clue how to drive a car with a clutch and a manual transmission. If you suddenly told them that they would not only have to do that, but change their own oil and adjust their own valves, their little heads would explode.

Your great-grandparents discarded manual shifting for perfectly intelligible reasons sixty-five years back.

Microsoft doesn't "Think Geek" and that is its strength.

A better 1-CD solution than OpenCD

[Orrin Bloquy]

Productivity:

OpenOffice 1.1.4 | jEdit 4.2 | Nvu 1.0 | PDFCreator 0.8

Graphics:

GIMP | Inkscape | Blender | POV-Ray

Media:

VLC | Audacity | JazzWare

Internet:

Gaim | Firefox | Thunderbird | HTTrack | TightVNC | 7Zip

Survival Kit:

BurnAtOnce | Darik's Boot and Nuke

Development:

Eclipse | Dev C++ | Cygwin | Bochs

Re:A better 1-CD solution than OpenCD

[WilliamSChips]

I agree with everything here except Bochs. Just do a s/Bochs/QEMU/ and you'll be fine though.

is linux for me?

[Anonymous Coward]

i have been using linux for about 8 years, the last two as my exclusive home desktop PC. the endless M$FT security vulnerabilities made me opt for linux, but in recent days, after getting a dvd burner, and trying to add xvid -> dvd burning to my suite of tools, the open source software delivery methods are wasting me time. the bottom line is that i think the open source community should bundle more. i grow weary of downloading 20 odd underlying libraries or products to do something new. since i don't consider upgrading to a new OS version for fashion to be fun, i end up having to upgrade core libraries, which breaks applications, which necessitates further downloads. it seems like on Windows, i download patches so others don't break my computer. on linux, i break my computer when i download new patches. as a professional software developer, i don't write products that have my end users download java and apache products to get mine to work. i don't know how endless dependency became synonymous with elegance; to me it seemless like endless compatibility risk. static link forever!

good but too short

[commodoresloat]

This is exactly what I've been looking for -- a simple, straightforward explanation and discussion of open source philosophy and technology that is both up to date and accessible to students likely trained on Windows who aren't particularly interested in computer science or technical details. I'll probably use this in a course that I teach, but I wish there were a little more detail on the philosophy and specifically some information about licensing -- there just isn't enough information about licensing at all here so you're right it makes it seem as if all open source licenses are the same.

Nahhh

[ImaLamer]

Following past trends it should be *inux.slashdot.org

Cygwin!

[ImaLamer]

Why not just use Cygwin's sshd? It can be installed with a dandy GUI and setup in three steps. Plus installing it with Cygwin gets you well onto the path of getting and using common GNU tools under Windows.

As far as performance and usability, I barely even noticed that I was logging into a Windows system when I used VI or Joe. Plus having Cygwin installed lets you take advantage of Bash scripting among other things. I just used it to secure VNC while visiting sunny Florida and it was great, and fast.

Others say the compression degrades performance, which I don't know too much about, but it secures your transfers and compresses data. An added plus is that you have free clients such as Putty which don't even need to be installed, just download and run. Then you've got tools like WinSCP to transfer files, which easily maxed out my (home computers) upload speed and generally worked great - everything finished exactly at the times I expected.

Shit, why isn't anyone saying Cygwin would be a good idea to introducing people to open source software. Of course it wouldn't be geared towards those who don't already "get" the computer, but I think if more people adopted it the development would go a lot faster and generally be better in the long run.

I want more Cygwin applications and support dammit! I want a day when I can download *any* (POSIX standard based) Linux software and install from source. (You don't know how long I've wanted to run XScreensaver under Windows)

open source is being misguided

[Anonymous Coward]

The uptake of open source software by the average user has little to do with it being open source. People want a free office app for the kids pc, they find open office. Want a free image app they find gimp. The fact that they are open source is irrelevant. People go for good products that beat the competition and/or save them money. But this will not lead to a massive uptake of open source software. Open source will only break this barrier if it shows true innovation. Why spend all your free time on projects that are merely alternatives to big name brands? The open source community should instead identify new ideas and exploit them. A good example is with games. I want to be able to make my own game. Currently I would have to get a cs degree and maybe if im lucky get a job with ea. However, it needn't be so hard! The open source community has the power to make game design as easy as writing a webpage. That used to be the domain of skilled programmers but now anyone can do it now! The same could happen with game design through open standards (xml), easy to use media librarys and idiot proof apis (javascript>.
 
To really be of value to mankind the open source community must focus its efforts on makeing cutting edge technology. This technology must then be quickly made acessible to the average programmer.

In soviet Russia...

[tduff]

...yeah.

Free as in freedom...

[ImaLamer]

Want to convince your business that open source is the best way to go? Why not get them to read, at minimum, chapter one of "Free as in Freedom"?

Even the idea that it can be read free online or printed out to read later is a selling point on all things open source.

http://www.oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/

I always start by saying, this software is totally free to use, but most importantly is designed as a tool to solve the problem - not just developed, packaged and sold to fill a market niche. If you explain the higher virtues of the software (correctly) to intelligent people they can't possibly turn it down.

Missing best options.

[twitter]

The first article is a good one at which to point someone who has never heard of Open Source.

Tim Gnatek disappoints by not once mentioning Knoppix, Mepis or Xandros, three easy and well known ways to introduce users to free and open software. There's nothing like booting a live CD on someone's dead Winblows computer to show them that nothing is wrong with the computer besides the software. All the "hard to use" FUD melts in the 60 seconds or so it takes to boot up. In the 20 minutes it takes to install, the user wonders why anyone would ever buy $500 worth of software in several boxes and CDs through innumerable reboots and "I agrees" Live CD are also less risky than the Open CD recommended.

Re:Missing best options.

[Anonymous Coward]

Moderators: Please note that "twitter" is a known fanatical sycophant whose obnoxious offtopic rants are legend here on Slashdot. It doesn't matter what the topic is, he'll find a way to scrape in some pointless Microsoft bashing. While nobody expects us to love Microsoft in any way, his particularly tepid style of calling anyone he replies to "troll" or "liar" or "fanboy" because he happens to disagree with whatever they're saying is well documented and should not be rewarded. If anything, twitter is the type of person that should not be part of the open source/free software community. He is an anathema to all that is good about free software.

I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider twitter and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Knoppix or Mepis or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.

If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than twitter. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.

To get an idea of what I'm talking about, check this post out. This is an article about email disclaimers. The parent of the post is complaining about the ads in the linked page and so on, and twitter actually goes off on a rant to blame it on Microsoft and recommend Lynx, because "is teh free".

Here's another. In this post twitter not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "GNU". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +4) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.

Here's that drive-by advocacy and FUD in motion: twitter goes on about some topic and then drops the usual "oh and M$ is teh evil" because "WMP phones home" or some such. Called on his FUD, he then claims that WMP stores every song and movie you've ever played in a file, somewhere. Pressed further, he just sort of slithers out of sight, his FUD-spreading complete. This is not about some Microsoft technology that nobody likes anyway; it's about lying for the sake of lying. Way too many of his posts are exactly like this one.

More? Just read though this post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own. Or these two. Or this one. Or this one.

Still not convinced? This is what twitter considers "humour" while going about his daily "M$" routine.

M

Celestia

[quacking duck]

I'm *so* glad I RTFA for this one, else I'd have missed this gem: Celestia, "a real-time, 3-D space simulation".

Think Google Earth, but for the solar system/galaxy/universe. I just spent a hour playing with this, checking out the plug-ins for real and fictional spacecraft.

Sure this will work... well....

[Freedom_v2.3]

Yeah, alright! I'm sure I can install open source project stuff on my granny's Linux PC. After all, if it doesn't work you simply have to recompile, write some more drivers, patch my kernel, check service version dependancies, etc...

While I'm foolishly ranting on a open source haven website, let me remind you that most open source projects are still listed as BETA and hardely ever reach their finished state(Check out the games section of freshmeat sometime).

Yeah, I'll get right on that open source wagon when M$ buys it out! (Freewave pokes at the silly little penguin) Is open source for me? No thanks, my enslaved soul still belongs to M$.

Re:Sure this will work... well....

[typical]

While I'm foolishly ranting on a open source haven website, let me remind you that most open source projects are still listed as BETA and hardely ever reach their finished state(Check out the games section of freshmeat sometime).

You do realize that there are a huge number of closed-source games that die a stillbirth in development as well? You just don't hear much about them (aside from maybe a product announcement somewhere that's never followed up on -- look at Gamespot's database of games, which includes announced games, and see how many were ever completed). The difference is that in the open source world, you have access to the stuff while it's still being developed.

Second of all, the concept of "done" is a lot more hazy. In the closed source world, you have to put out a "product" that nobody can modify. You have to "freeze". This has some pluses and some minuses, and we've learned to live with most of the drawbacks. The open source world doesn't really have this. For example, take grub, the Linux bootloader (well, technically it's a generic bootloader, but it probably spends most cycles booting Linux). The version I have on my system is .95. Now, it is a highly stable piece of software, and heavily tested everywhere. The perception of its authors is that it is not a "complete" work yet, so they have not tagged it 1.0 yet. However, I have no problem trusting production machines to it whatsoever, nor do hordes of other open source users out there.

Yeah, alright! I'm sure I can install open source project stuff on my granny's Linux PC. After all, if it doesn't work you simply have to recompile, write some more drivers, patch my kernel, check service version dependancies, etc...

Recompilation/kernel patching is essentially a relic of a bygone time, when kernels were not modular. This is not the case for any of the mainstream desktop distros -- it might be for some specialized embedded systems, but those are not running in your granny's house at all, unless it's on her VCR. Dependencies are auto-handled in all distros these days that I'm aware of by auto-downloading, installing, and auto-updating any required software, which is beyond what Windows can do.

While I'm foolishly ranting on a open source haven website, let me remind you that most open source projects are still listed as BETA and hardely ever reach their finished state(Check out the games section of freshmeat sometime).

For most game genres, open source does *not* work that well. The bulk of effort in developing a "modern" game (where modern == the sort of thing that you'd find on a Wal-Mart shelf) is not in code, but in audio and artwork, not the sort of thing that most programmers specialize in. Even so, there are some good open source games out there (Battle for Wesnoth is a favorite), and if you can stretch your tastes to some quite non-traditional games (TADS, Tales of Middle Earth), you can discover some games with an incredible amount more code than a traditional commercial game, and much more sophisticated gameplay, but limited graphics. Honestly, if your primary use for your operating system is to provide a platform to run games, Linux may well not be a good choice. It simply does not have a large commercial game library.

Open letter to F/OSS community

[Sixpack, Joe]

Speaking as a representative for the average computer user, I will try to explain the average pc user to the F/OSS crowd. Please note that I do not have a great deal of free time to carry on a dialog after this is posted. I will however try to reply to any serious questions as time permits.

  First, as average pc users, we don't really care about the whole F/OSS concept. We will never write code and we couldn't care less about the philosophical purpose behind what you write and distribute for free. Of course we can relate to free beer; that gets us excited. But more than just free software, what we want is software that just works and doesn't make us jump through hoops to make it work. We want to be able to pop in a CD or download a file and click something to make it work. We don't care what is going on under the hood. As long as it's not sending our credit card numbers to thieves or revealing our porn to our wives, we simply don't care how or why it works. If one organization could sell or give us a master program that did anything we wanted it to do, we would be very happy, clueless campers. We would not care in the least if an evil monopolist was controlling the entire computer industry - as long as our email, chat, photos, music, games, banking, and porn just worked.

The adventurous among us, that have investigated this F/OSS concept, have simply been intimidated or confused by the overwhelming amount of indiscernible information we're faced with. We've downloaded several of the so-called easy versions of something related to Linux, but we've ultimately given up because everything takes a lot of research and fumbling to get it working right. Every time we look for answers to a question about how to do X, we're faced with cryptic messages about compilers, command lines, wrappers, shells and whatnot. We don't want to know how to compile anything. We don't care what a command line is. We can't tell the difference between a shell and a GUI. Why should we have to? Quite simply, we are not interested in being programmers - we have other interests, jobs, and time consuming responsibilities.

Now the really, really determined amongst us will seek out knowledge by frequenting newsgroups, forums, or websites devoted to this free software. Unfortunately, the predominate thing we see happening in these areas is a bunch of infighting and bitching about how one distro is better than another, or how Microsoft is Satan incorporated. There's always a lot of talk about security and clueless users but, rarely is there any real substance that actually helps moving us clueless users into a more secure environment; at least not without requiring us to take a couple CS courses.

What's worse is the general attitude amongst a lot of the F/OSS community, which seems to believe they are somehow intellectually superior to those of us in the world that choose to spend our time learning something other than operating systems and protocols. As we see it, we don't expect you to know how to perform open heart surgery; or perhaps how to knit a woolen sweater, yet you are able to benefit from both of those, thanks to our hard work. All we ask is that you likewise provide us with a product which we can use without needing to know how you produced it or how it works.

In closing, it's not that we don't appreciate the efforts you put forth, we just ask you to remember that we are average users. Our skills and aptitudes vary widely. Also remember that we will gladly adopt anything that makes our lives easier, more productive, more secure, or just more interesting. What we will not accept however is the premise that we must devote an inordinate amount of time to learning how to install, use, and maintain your software; no matter what the perks are. There are at least two companies which already sell us stuff that just works; for the most part.

Re:Open letter to F/OSS community

[pglee]

hear, hear! I am moderately compute literate, but find myself in the positions outlined in the previous post. I agree with everything joe said. OpenOffice is great, my company uses MS products. I tried using OO at home but my excel models wouldn't translate.

Re:Open letter to F/OSS community

[big ben bullet]

Speaking as a representative for the average computer user, I will try to explain the average pc user to the F/OSS crowd. Please note that I do not have a great deal of free time to carry on a dialog after this is posted. I will however try to reply to any serious questions as time permits.

I wouldn't call me a representative for the more tech savvy computer users, though in fact I am more tech savvy. I will try to explain a few things for you as clearly as possible. Hopefully you can benefit from open source in you own way too.

First, as average pc users, we don't really care about the whole F/OSS concept. We will never write code and we couldn't care less about the philosophical purpose behind what you write and distribute for free. Of course we can relate to free beer; that gets us excited.

Yeah well, I don't really care about the philosophical purposes of the whole F/OSS concept either. Though I'm a bit lazy by nature, I have written some occasional line of (open) source code. And I too get excited by the expectancy of free beer.

But more than just free software, what we want is software that just works and doesn't make us jump through hoops to make it work. We want to be able to pop in a CD or download a file and click something to make it work. We don't care what is going on under the hood. As long as it's not sending our credit card numbers to thieves or revealing our porn to our wives, we simply don't care how or why it works. If one organization could sell or give us a master program that did anything we wanted it to do, we would be very happy, clueless campers. We would not care in the least if an evil monopolist was controlling the entire computer industry - as long as our email, chat, photos, music, games, banking, and porn just worked.

Let me make this one thing very clear: If you want your windows games... stay clear of an open source operating system. A bunch of people will disagree with me and will start a discussion about transgamings cedega and how it's the best or worst thing (pick your camp) to happen to the open source gaming community. But believe me: an average computer user like you won't be willing to cope with all the cedega quirks (neither financial nor technical).

If on the other hand you're happy playing the games that do exist for linux, or aren't interested in playing games, the other things you mention can all 'just work' given the fact that you (or a tech savvy friend) install a descent user-friendly free linux distribution. I will get back on this a bit further...

The adventurous among us, that have investigated this F/OSS concept, have simply been intimidated or confused by the overwhelming amount of indiscernible information we're faced with. We've downloaded several of the so-called easy versions of something related to Linux, but we've ultimately given up because everything takes a lot of research and fumbling to get it working right. Every time we look for answers to a question about how to do X, we're faced with cryptic messages about compilers, command lines, wrappers, shells and whatnot. We don't want to know how to compile anything. We don't care what a command line is. We can't tell the difference between a shell and a GUI. Why should we have to? Quite simply, we are not interested in being programmers - we have other interests, jobs, and time consuming responsibilities.

Now the really, really determined amongst us will seek out knowledge by frequenting newsgroups, forums, or websites devoted to this free software. Unfortunately, the predominate thing we see happening in these areas is a bunch of infighting and bitching about how one distro is better than another, or how Microsoft is Satan incorporated. There's always a lot of talk about security and clueless users but, rarely is there any real substance that actually helps moving us clueless users into a more secure environment; at least not without requiring us to take a couple CS courses.


There are easy versions of Li

Re:Open letter to F/OSS community

[Sixpack, Joe]

Thanks for taking the time to reply in a thoughtful manner. I figured the post would be modded troll and ignored by everyone. I also posted it a lot later than I had hoped, so I guess most didn't see it at all.

I was just venting about many points I've observed, but most of them hold more truth than some people writing here likes to admit. It's not going to change the world, but I feel better having posted it.

Funny thing is I'm actually a bit more tech savvy than the average user myself. If I have trouble with something, the real average user hasn't a prayer.

You're Apple comment is classic. I and many other average users are headed in that direction, but Apple will have to change their marketing campaign if they want to attract a large percentage of us. The money isn't the issue for many; they just think Apple is still a graphics professional's machine. That and they don't want to give up their scroll-wheel, multi-button mouse. ; )

Re:Open letter to F/OSS community

[big ben bullet]

Funny thing is... i was on to you too ;)

but i figured i'd bite

It was an excellent opportunity to state some of the things i said. And indeed; too bad this all was posted a bit late.

Re:Open letter to F/OSS community

[WhiteWolf666]

I agree with the Parent, GP, and great-GP.

LOL

Anyways, if you look at my posting history, you'll see a billion responses (all linux adovacy, usually SuSE). I am a big fan of Transgaming's Cedega, and I'd argue the following:

If you want a computer that just works (office/work type stuff), Linux is ready for you, and almost as good as Apple.

If you want a computer that plays certain games very well with great easy, Linux is ready for you. This mean you only play linux games. Linux games versus Apple games? Apple wins.

If you want the above two, plus the ability to play Windows games, Linux beats the heck out of Apple. (I say this as a person who loves Mac OS X, who owns a Mac Mini and a Powerbook). Even though Cedega is 'quirky', it means I can play Half-Life 2 on my Linux box.

This is a big deal. Linux is ready for the desktop in terms of native apps. All you need to do is pickup a copy of SuSE, and you'll be playing Linux games, and running Linux office apps Out-Of-Box. Windows applications are harder, but at least its possible. Virtual PC, IMHO, sucks, bad.

Even in terms of system virtualization, at least with the latest VMware you can run Direct3D games (hardware 3D access, finally, yeah!). With OS X, you firmly live in the OS X world. No Windows apps avaliable. This has made me come down on the linux side of the fence, I think.

Regarding Cedega. Transgaming really has the some great code there, however, their default configuration *really* *really* sucks. Nearly *every* game requires configuration tweaks, even games that are A-list Cedega titles with active support.

This doesn't make any sense to me, and I'm working on a project that will load up the correct optimizations on a game-by-game basis, similar to the way that Codeweaver's Crossover Office works.

Cedega and Point2Play would be perfect if they loaded these optimizations correctly. Sadly, it really is too confusing for some people to have to go to the settings menu and click and unclick boxes. Its also stupid to require that, since there really is (depending on your video card (ATI/Nvidia)) a best configuration.

My dream product is a Point2Play work-a-like that detects the CD you just inserted, starts cedega for the install with the exactly corrected, heavily tweaked on a per-game-basis configuration file, and then puts entries in your Gnome/KDE system menu, as well as having access to a Cedega-only-Point2Play gui. This would allow Cedega to clear the last hurdle to users such as yourself.

Re:NEWS FLASH, free software, no viruses

[cyber_rigger]

The "average" PC user doesn't give a flying fuck about the "Open Source" movement or Linux or whatever.

The MAJORITY of "average" PC users,
at least the ones I've met,

actually like

free software

no viruses.

State of network file systems sucks

[typical]

The current state of network file systems is just sad. I should be able to flip a switch (i.e. "deployment" instaneous and does not require a network admin) somewhere on any system and easily "share" files with other systems. I should have good performance, the protocol should be open, there should be no potential for data loss, and my connection should be secure (or at least reasonably secureable).

None of the major contenders fill this role

Aggravating the situation is the fact that NFSes are prime candidates for user-space client implementations -- performance is unlikely to be CPU-bound, and security and complexity is more of an issue. Neither LUFS nor FUSE has made it into the mainstream kernel last I checked.

Re:Not recommended?!?!?

[IWantMoreSpamPlease]

Then you don't work in the same circles I do.

I have several clients who run CNC milling machines. Big ones, for the Big 3 automakers. They make very specific custom widgets.

If the software that controls the hardware fucks up, and it's obvious (or provable), then the software maker eats the cost of any widgets made that weren't made right.

There *are* industries out there were 100% uptime, and 100% accuracy, are default requirements of the software.

Re: An Open Source Guide For The Average PC User

[Anonymous Coward]

I think fravia's http://www.searchlores.org/ and his "bangla" project http://www.searchlores.org/bangla.htm are well worth being remembered in this context