It's not just a matter of money, it's a huge matter of convenience- that's what drives a large part of the consumer market. Make it easy, transparent, no thought required, and you'll have a chance.
On one hand, it really sucks to see people throw up their hands and say "We've LOST, let's go home." I don't see this as a "war" between M$$ and Linux, I see it as a process that involves building alternatives, and educating consumers about their availability. Some processes take time...
Also, consider this- there's not too much more that M$ can pack into upgrades of Excel and Word. For all practical purposes, each successive upgrade (from a consumer perspective) will offer diminishing returns. This is the reason that a company like M$ would want to turn the whole notion of a software "purchase" into a software "rental." Change it from a tangible commodity into a service, and you've got yourself a nice fat, predictable revenue stream. And you don't have to resort to extortion to get people to upgrade.
There are two things I think the Linux camp can do to continue with this process: focus on the little things that make it suck, and do what it takes to provide seamless interchange between apps on Linux, and apps on Doze. Consumers are generally lazy, so CONVENIENCE is the key.
Something else - some of the bigger companies offer lots of service options. If you have some of them (some you can do without), cancel them. They get real defensive when you cancel services, especially since it affects their bottom line. Or call about subscribing to some of them, but mention that you're not sure you want to because of their privacy policy.
A simple fact: If the product doesn't cater to the needs of the professional user, it won't be used by professionals. Maya does, Blender doesn't. There is a great deal of tedium that can be done manually, but with little justification that it should be - in many cases (but not all), this has less to do with one's skill, and more to do with one's desire to produce something within a reasonable time frame and within reasonable cost constraints.
Regardless of the source of this sudden and ongoing interest in dismantling the rights of citizens, the only image I can conjure up when thinking about these legislative attacks on American freedom (legislative terrorism?) is that of a bunch of monkeys playing in a sandbox. I think the government will take every opportunity to play with this and push it to its absolute limit. I would not be surprised history repeats itself and we end up seeing the same kinds abuses what were common during the Eisenhower presidency.
Even though I consider myself a quintessential computer geek, it even gets tiring for me having to figure out things like why KDE 3.0 won't compile according to the directions. Sometimes I just want it to work, because I have other things I need to be doing instead.
I'd like to make sure that I also state how incredibly cool KDE is, as well as many other linux-based apps. Kudos to all of the developers who have contributed their time and talent. BUT...I hope that we move away from a seemingly pervasive mode of thinking that says, "oh well, they'll figure it out...". Linux developers need to start thinking like end users. Even if it means covering the smallest of details, what you end up with is a very polished app that leaves little to go wrong. This is not time unwisely invested, because even for users that are technically inclined, it's still annoying when things don't work as they're intended.
Simple - you are deriving benefit from the value that the software offers, and the company gets nothing in return. Another way of looking at it is how much it would cost you to accomplish the same thing without the software. That's what gives the software value, and that's what you're paying for.
morally wrong to deprive another human being access to a tool that they could use to improve their condition because they cannot afford it, when it costs you nothing at all to provide them the tool.
Based on what, exactly?
You are making two very false assumptions: first, that it did, in fact, cost me nothing to produce, and second, that you are somehow entitled to reap the benefits of my labor an expertise for free simply because it will improve your lot in life. I have a news flash for you: I'm not your freaking keeper, and neither is anyone else. If you want what I have to offer, BUY it. If you can't afford it, I don't see how it's my problem. STEALING is the moral issue here, not selling the fruits of my own labor.
You sir are in the untennable position of proposing that money is the ultimae judge of a mans worth.
As opposed to what...one's abilty to simply take what ever they feel their entitled to? I'd hardly call this an indication of positive worth.
Seems to me it's hard to find out just how much money the software companies are really losing because not all people who pirate their software are people who would ever pay for it.
Whether or not they would have paid for it is beside tbe point. It still involves theft of the value that the software provides.
So you advocate the valuation of a sophisticated tool for skilled artists based on what you can do with it? It's not my intent to offend you, but might I suggest using something else that's more in line with your skills, price range, and scope of application?
It also applies to acquiring value without due compensation, or supplying this value to others. Face it...software has value, because if it didn't, there would be no demand for it. So, you might not be making a profit, but you ARE benefitting from its value.
Our records indicate that your use of the song, "I wanna kick some MS ass" is in violation of your current license. Press "OK" to charge the credit card on file with Passport $19.99 to acquire the correct license, or "Cancel" to remove the song from your hard drive. If you choose to remove the song, you will be charged a $10.00 fine for violating the terms of the license. Have a nice day, and thank you for using Microsoft!
...when a company has so much influence that it can dictate your IT strategy to you through arcane licensing, and planned obsolescence of products that may otherwise be perfectly suitable. I'm looking forward to the day when users and businesses decide they've had enough, and tell Gate$ & Co. exactly what they can do with the new licensing and downgrades. It will be a great day indeed. Too bad I can only dream...few people have the moxie required to pull this off.
Re:to understand the interface, buy the blender bo
on
Blender Goes Open Source
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Many posts regarding the interface describe it as "good once you get to know it." The challenge for any good interface designer isn't to just throw together bunches of related buttons and sliders, but to hopefully make their use, as well as the process required to learn them, as easy as practically possible. There are several instances where Blender could use some real improvement in this regard. Few if any software apps are so good that it cannot be improved, and Blender is no exception.
There's nothing really wrong with all the graphic stuff if it's done wisely. In other words, if you can make it look nice without hindering or obscuring the workflow, then go for it.
If something is 'intuitive', it means that its purpose and/or function can be easily ascertained from the placement and presentation within the overall interface. Blender's interface is a lot of things, it but it is NOT intuitive.
I've used Blender for about two years, and as far as interfaces goes, it sucks rocks. Admittedly, there are certain aspects that are nice, even brilliant, but there are others that make using it unnecessarily difficult and cumbersome. I am hoping that the open source initiative will lead to cleaning up the interface so that it is more consistent, and functionally better. And for cripes sake - get an UNDO function.
I was thinking about this just this morning. I came to the conclusion that it may not be forced upgrade so much as turning software from a commodity into a service. Think about it - how many new features can MS possibly add to its office suite to justify a new upgrade? If the 80/20 rule holds true, then each successive upgrade would hold increasingly diminished returns for the user. So, what better way round this than to scrap the entire model of selling software and offering periodic upgrades to keep your user base interested? Just offer it as a service - you want it, you pay a monthly fee. You don't want it, you don't pay the fee - you get whatever happens to be running on M$'s servers. Can you say CA$H COW?
And google deserves high accolades for this. Not only are the ads easily identifiable, they blend in nicely with their surroundings. I *have* clicked on the ads more than once, if I happened to have been searching for information on a particular type of product. Google's got it right- unintrusive, yet accessible. The market droids won't agree, but what does that matter?
In a world where the biggest two or three players in a market enjoy 90% of the revenue, and also enjoy tremenous cost savings in marketing and buying thanks to scale, the game becomes to grow and dominate as quickly as possible.
I disagree. Huge companies huge infrastructures to support, often built on unsound assumptions about the market (the.com boom/bust). The good thing about "growing" a company is that it can lead to a solid foundation and much tighter control over expenses. You get to know the market better because you can actually take the time to understand where it's going. When the big guys fall (many of them have, and more will), the solidly-built smaller companies will have a field day.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not just a matter of money, it's a huge matter of convenience- that's what drives a large part of the consumer market. Make it easy, transparent, no thought required, and you'll have a chance.
On one hand, it really sucks to see people throw up their hands and say "We've LOST, let's go home." I don't see this as a "war" between M$$ and Linux, I see it as a process that involves building alternatives, and educating consumers about their availability. Some processes take time...
Also, consider this- there's not too much more that M$ can pack into upgrades of Excel and Word. For all practical purposes, each successive upgrade (from a consumer perspective) will offer diminishing returns. This is the reason that a company like M$ would want to turn the whole notion of a software "purchase" into a software "rental." Change it from a tangible commodity into a service, and you've got yourself a nice fat, predictable revenue stream. And you don't have to resort to extortion to get people to upgrade.
There are two things I think the Linux camp can do to continue with this process: focus on the little things that make it suck, and do what it takes to provide seamless interchange between apps on Linux, and apps on Doze. Consumers are generally lazy, so CONVENIENCE is the key.
Something else - some of the bigger companies offer lots of service options. If you have some of them (some you can do without), cancel them. They get real defensive when you cancel services, especially since it affects their bottom line. Or call about subscribing to some of them, but mention that you're not sure you want to because of their privacy policy.
A simple fact: If the product doesn't cater to the needs of the professional user, it won't be used by professionals. Maya does, Blender doesn't. There is a great deal of tedium that can be done manually, but with little justification that it should be - in many cases (but not all), this has less to do with one's skill, and more to do with one's desire to produce something within a reasonable time frame and within reasonable cost constraints.
Regardless of the source of this sudden and ongoing interest in dismantling the rights of citizens, the only image I can conjure up when thinking about these legislative attacks on American freedom (legislative terrorism?) is that of a bunch of monkeys playing in a sandbox. I think the government will take every opportunity to play with this and push it to its absolute limit. I would not be surprised history repeats itself and we end up seeing the same kinds abuses what were common during the Eisenhower presidency.
You're forgetting intent, which is a significant part of how many laws are applied.
Suck it up.
This whole nonsense about Apple making deals that have come as a surprise to M$ execs...it's hard when you have to swallow your own m.o., isn't it?
Even though I consider myself a quintessential computer geek, it even gets tiring for me having to figure out things like why KDE 3.0 won't compile according to the directions. Sometimes I just want it to work, because I have other things I need to be doing instead.
I'd like to make sure that I also state how incredibly cool KDE is, as well as many other linux-based apps. Kudos to all of the developers who have contributed their time and talent. BUT...I hope that we move away from a seemingly pervasive mode of thinking that says, "oh well, they'll figure it out...". Linux developers need to start thinking like end users. Even if it means covering the smallest of details, what you end up with is a very polished app that leaves little to go wrong. This is not time unwisely invested, because even for users that are technically inclined, it's still annoying when things don't work as they're intended.
Simple - you are deriving benefit from the value that the software offers, and the company gets nothing in return. Another way of looking at it is how much it would cost you to accomplish the same thing without the software. That's what gives the software value, and that's what you're paying for.
morally wrong to deprive another human being access to a tool that they could use to improve their condition because they cannot afford it, when it costs you nothing at all to provide them the tool.
Based on what, exactly?
You are making two very false assumptions: first, that it did, in fact, cost me nothing to produce, and second, that you are somehow entitled to reap the benefits of my labor an expertise for free simply because it will improve your lot in life. I have a news flash for you: I'm not your freaking keeper, and neither is anyone else. If you want what I have to offer, BUY it. If you can't afford it, I don't see how it's my problem. STEALING is the moral issue here, not selling the fruits of my own labor.
You sir are in the untennable position of proposing that money is the ultimae judge of a mans worth.
As opposed to what...one's abilty to simply take what ever they feel their entitled to? I'd hardly call this an indication of positive worth.
Seems to me it's hard to find out just how much money the software companies are really losing because not all people who pirate their software are people who would ever pay for it.
Whether or not they would have paid for it is beside tbe point. It still involves theft of the value that the software provides.
How about teaching them that it's wrong to steal? I guess it's not that hard to figure out why disasters like Worldcom and Enron happen.
So you advocate the valuation of a sophisticated tool for skilled artists based on what you can do with it? It's not my intent to offend you, but might I suggest using something else that's more in line with your skills, price range, and scope of application?
It also applies to acquiring value without due compensation, or supplying this value to others. Face it...software has value, because if it didn't, there would be no demand for it. So, you might not be making a profit, but you ARE benefitting from its value.
Our records indicate that your use of the song, "I wanna kick some MS ass" is in violation of your current license. Press "OK" to charge the credit card on file with Passport $19.99 to acquire the correct license, or "Cancel" to remove the song from your hard drive. If you choose to remove the song, you will be charged a $10.00 fine for violating the terms of the license. Have a nice day, and thank you for using Microsoft!
I'll happily take my business elsewhere. Simple as that.
Tell that to the people at ILM.
Many posts regarding the interface describe it as "good once you get to know it." The challenge for any good interface designer isn't to just throw together bunches of related buttons and sliders, but to hopefully make their use, as well as the process required to learn them, as easy as practically possible. There are several instances where Blender could use some real improvement in this regard. Few if any software apps are so good that it cannot be improved, and Blender is no exception.
There's nothing really wrong with all the graphic stuff if it's done wisely. In other words, if you can make it look nice without hindering or obscuring the workflow, then go for it.
If something is 'intuitive', it means that its purpose and/or function can be easily ascertained from the placement and presentation within the overall interface. Blender's interface is a lot of things, it but it is NOT intuitive.
I've used Blender for about two years, and as far as interfaces goes, it sucks rocks. Admittedly, there are certain aspects that are nice, even brilliant, but there are others that make using it unnecessarily difficult and cumbersome. I am hoping that the open source initiative will lead to cleaning up the interface so that it is more consistent, and functionally better. And for cripes sake - get an UNDO function.
I was thinking about this just this morning. I came to the conclusion that it may not be forced upgrade so much as turning software from a commodity into a service. Think about it - how many new features can MS possibly add to its office suite to justify a new upgrade? If the 80/20 rule holds true, then each successive upgrade would hold increasingly diminished returns for the user. So, what better way round this than to scrap the entire model of selling software and offering periodic upgrades to keep your user base interested? Just offer it as a service - you want it, you pay a monthly fee. You don't want it, you don't pay the fee - you get whatever happens to be running on M$'s servers. Can you say CA$H COW?
And google deserves high accolades for this. Not only are the ads easily identifiable, they blend in nicely with their surroundings. I *have* clicked on the ads more than once, if I happened to have been searching for information on a particular type of product. Google's got it right- unintrusive, yet accessible. The market droids won't agree, but what does that matter?
This is OT, but do many Slashdotters even use kazaa, it being nasty spyware and all?
In a world where the biggest two or three players in a market enjoy 90% of the revenue, and also enjoy tremenous cost savings in marketing and buying thanks to scale, the game becomes to grow and dominate as quickly as possible.
.com boom/bust). The good thing about "growing" a company is that it can lead to a solid foundation and much tighter control over expenses. You get to know the market better because you can actually take the time to understand where it's going. When the big guys fall (many of them have, and more will), the solidly-built smaller companies will have a field day.
I disagree. Huge companies huge infrastructures to support, often built on unsound assumptions about the market (the
I personally think this is a clever little semantic trick created by the religionists on the right.
The state, however, cannot promote or affirm the existence of God, as it does in the pledge.