Exactly! This is the problem anyone faces when trying to unseat a well-entrenched competitor. Their product needs to be either so radically better that any sane person will put up with the changes to get the benefits (and that isn't the case here), or needs to ease the new users in by presenting them with a familiar face. It's rather similar to the need to support legacy hardware for a long time.
search around the internet site of the company offering the software until you find a download button Already covered by the GP.
download a file 3 times as large as it should be because it needs to contain versions of every library used by the application Irrelevant. The size of the file is in no way related to usability, unless the file is truly gargantuan (and that's unlikely).
these libraries and the application will not be automatically updated so turning the software into a security risk Ridiculously irrelevant. Security has nothing to do with usability, and we're not comparing the usability of updating applications here, we're comparing the usability of installing applications.
should i carry on? Go ahead, but it'd be good for you if you can come up with things that support your argument, rather than being random shots off into nowhere.
Wait, what's that you say? Microsoft has a stranglehold on hardware manufacturers so that their specs and drivers are often only available to Windows? And? If one is aiming to capture the majority of computer users, they need to realize (and cope with) the fact that these people don't give a flying fsck why their stuff doesn't work. They care that it doesn't work. In a perfect world, all device manufacturers would be writing Linux drivers for their products, but they're lazy/cheap, so it's up to the Linux development community to do it... if they ever want to become big-time players, at least.
The playing field may not be level (and, in fact, is not, as you correctly recognize), but you'll get a lot further by working to compensate for that fact than by complaining about how unfair reality is.
True, although it's hard to say from the summary whether the submitter is actually opposed to commercial software or not. If he is, shame on him for reducing his options... but hopefully he's looking for quality software first, and its free/commercial status is a secondary consideration.
Data already is clearly different from executables, though. You don't have to have much expertise to differentiate *.exe from *.mpg, *.jpg, *.wav, etc. As far as I've ever seen, users just aren't interested in learning this stuff. They're content to just have the computer be a magic black box that they always say yes to, cause it has their best interests at heart. That's the real problem.
At this point, I've given up on the current generation of users. My hope now is that people in their 20s and younger, as they get older, will be less afraid of the damn machines, and be willing to learn, because they're used to computers.
Maybe even install a bootloader to display Apple, Ubuntu, & FreeBSD's websites. It's been said before, but apparently needs to be repeated: users are a bigger security risk than the OS could ever aspire to be. To quote the wikipedia entry on Storm:
When an attachment is opened, the malware installs the wincom32 service, and injects a payload... How do you propose to stop stupid users from manually opening malware, just by giving them a new OS?
It's not particularly illegitimate to use them in that fashion, though. It's a matter of allocating limited resources, really. While I'll mod up posts I disagree with, but are insightful, if there are no posts I agree with available... I'd rather spend those mod points giving karma to people I agree with. Is it fair? Not entirely, but with only 5 or 10 points, there's only so much good you can do.
The real moderation bias which is a cause for concern is modding with negative mods as a substitute for "disagree". That's bullshit, and there's no excuse for it.
They won't use the GPL, then? Seems like a reasonable solution to me, and there are tons of other licenses to choose from.
For that matter, why the hell would they choose the GPL in the first place? Wouldn't that mean that anyone who uses the official Java class libraries has to make their software GPL?
how has Java being closed source affected you personally Not at all. I'm not an open-source zealot, and I choose the best tool for the job, whether it's open-source, proprietary, or personally written by my worst enemy.
what effects do you see this having in the future? Zealots will stop whining. Sensible people won't really care.
There's a HUGE fucking difference. While the ability to maintain something indefinitely (ie, the thing open-source brings to the table) may be a factor, it's far from the only one. And for my money, it should be dead last on the list of things to consider when choosing a language, including "Did the quarter come up heads or tails?".
"Backups" must be made of every system because of Microsoft's obnoxious registry and other anti copy technology won't allow for centralized image repositories. Huh. All these years, the centralized image repositories (containing Windows images) at my jobs were impossible. Who knew?
Also, as others have quite succinctly pointed out, you've obviously never properly filled up a hard drive if you really think Windows takes any appreciable percentage of your space.
In OSX when you "maximize" a window, that window does not fill the screen. The window gets big enough to display its contents while being constrained by the screen (The window won't grow outside of the bounds of the screen). It takes a bit to get used to and there are some quirks. (For example, if I "maximize" the window and then zoom the contents I have to "maximize" again to resize the window to make it fit.) However, with a wide screen it does make a lot of difference. If I open up a code window and a reference document, I can "maximize" both of them and put them side by side without having to grab the handle and stretch the windows. That's actually pretty damn cool, thanks for the info!
And of course therefore if you yourself never had a single problem with it, then nobody else did. No, it's highly likely that if I, in my rather typical computer use, didn't have any problems, that either this guy's problem is a) highly specific, and not representative of the quality of the OS, or b) made up.
Windows XP SP1 was not "a damn good OS" (nor any version of Windows for that matter, but leaving that aside). If it was, there would have been no need for SP2. Well, every version of Windows since 2000 has been a damn good OS, but leaving that aside... your logic is laughable. The fact that an OS needs updates makes it poor? Well, guess that makes every OS bad, by your standards. "Perfect the first time" is a highly unreasonable standard.
Very true. I've been using Vista since it was available on Newegg, and have had almost no problems (not none, but then again, it isn't like people have no problems in any OS). It works beautifully, people crying about Vista are either a) unfortunate in the fact that their hardware/app isn't supported (and this isn't the majority of the problems), or b) spreading FUD.
Windows XP was first released in 2001. Windows XP created severe problems for us until SP2 was released in 2004. Unless you have something highly specific in mind, I call bullshit. I used XP SP1 for forever (SP2 broke all my games which used the Quake 3 engine, which was a good few at the time, for about six months to a year after it came out), and never had a single problem with it. I didn't use SP0, but XP SP1 was a damn good OS.
I hope you're being facetious about making pan & scan DVDs illegal. Anyways, I know that a lot of people prefer to watch a 4:3 picture on a 4:3 TV. When they get a widescreen TV, they start buying widescreen media.
How, out of curiosity, are you managing your OSX windows that makes it so much easier than in XP? Personally, I find window management in OSX to be a fucking nightmare in general, due to that damnable one-menu-bar-per-system philosophy Apple has. I'm having a hard time imagining, as a result, what it is that is so much easier in OSX for you.
I fail to see how that's the case. Company X has a monopoly on something that would be freely available otherwise, so company Y, rather than spending $0 on the software, spends $Z, taking that money out of some other part of their budget. The cost to the rest of the market is, then, exactly $Z. Furthermore, the cost to the market as a whole should be $0, because it doesn't matter to the big picture where, exactly, the money is being spent.
I haven't studied economics, so I may be way off, but it seems really simple and straightforward to me.
Business that don't do this will be opened to lawsuits As they should be. No. Absolutely not. While it's reasonable to say that a business should not be allowed to actively discriminate against certain types of customers, it is entirely unreasonable to require them to actively support certain types of customers. If a business doesn't wish to cater to the handicapped, that is their business, and perfectly within their rights as a private organization (after all, I don't accomodate handicapped people in my home, because it's my damn business).
Contrary to the popular beliefs of society these days, businesses are private, and not required to make life easier or more pleasant for you. All they are required to do is to not deliberately make life more difficult for you.
Although I mostly agree with your points, I feel compelled to point out that non-round doorknobs are a godsend for us IT guys too. You try turning a round doorknob when your arms are full carrying a big-ass CRT!;)
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly! This is the problem anyone faces when trying to unseat a well-entrenched competitor. Their product needs to be either so radically better that any sane person will put up with the changes to get the benefits (and that isn't the case here), or needs to ease the new users in by presenting them with a familiar face. It's rather similar to the need to support legacy hardware for a long time.
The playing field may not be level (and, in fact, is not, as you correctly recognize), but you'll get a lot further by working to compensate for that fact than by complaining about how unfair reality is.
True, although it's hard to say from the summary whether the submitter is actually opposed to commercial software or not. If he is, shame on him for reducing his options... but hopefully he's looking for quality software first, and its free/commercial status is a secondary consideration.
At this point, I've given up on the current generation of users. My hope now is that people in their 20s and younger, as they get older, will be less afraid of the damn machines, and be willing to learn, because they're used to computers.
The real moderation bias which is a cause for concern is modding with negative mods as a substitute for "disagree". That's bullshit, and there's no excuse for it.
For that matter, why the hell would they choose the GPL in the first place? Wouldn't that mean that anyone who uses the official Java class libraries has to make their software GPL?
There's a HUGE fucking difference. While the ability to maintain something indefinitely (ie, the thing open-source brings to the table) may be a factor, it's far from the only one. And for my money, it should be dead last on the list of things to consider when choosing a language, including "Did the quarter come up heads or tails?".
Also, as others have quite succinctly pointed out, you've obviously never properly filled up a hard drive if you really think Windows takes any appreciable percentage of your space.
Mods, please mod parent post up, it is factually accurate and not a damn troll.
Very true. I've been using Vista since it was available on Newegg, and have had almost no problems (not none, but then again, it isn't like people have no problems in any OS). It works beautifully, people crying about Vista are either a) unfortunate in the fact that their hardware/app isn't supported (and this isn't the majority of the problems), or b) spreading FUD.
I hope you're being facetious about making pan & scan DVDs illegal. Anyways, I know that a lot of people prefer to watch a 4:3 picture on a 4:3 TV. When they get a widescreen TV, they start buying widescreen media.
How, out of curiosity, are you managing your OSX windows that makes it so much easier than in XP? Personally, I find window management in OSX to be a fucking nightmare in general, due to that damnable one-menu-bar-per-system philosophy Apple has. I'm having a hard time imagining, as a result, what it is that is so much easier in OSX for you.
Clearly, the submitter is an FPS noob who doesn't know that it's "capture", not "steal", the flag! ;)
I haven't studied economics, so I may be way off, but it seems really simple and straightforward to me.
Oh, I completely agree, I just felt the need to point out how great non-round doorknobs are. :)
Contrary to the popular beliefs of society these days, businesses are private, and not required to make life easier or more pleasant for you. All they are required to do is to not deliberately make life more difficult for you.
Although I mostly agree with your points, I feel compelled to point out that non-round doorknobs are a godsend for us IT guys too. You try turning a round doorknob when your arms are full carrying a big-ass CRT! ;)