Re:Nope, it's the putative new users problem
on
Linux Needs Critics
·
· Score: 1
I don't think most Linux guys do #3, more like #2. Its the Windows folks that tend to do #3, then they run back to Windows.
Re:Nope, it's the putative new users problem
on
Linux Needs Critics
·
· Score: 1
No, again, you're missing the point. Nobody is asserting that you need to only buy hardware spec'd for Linux. The point he's making is that if you want to run Linux, you need to confirm your hardware works with it. Your analogy doesn't work here either. The one I used earlier might work better--if you own a set of wheels and go buy a car without first checking to see that your wheels will work, do you blame the car manufacturer, the dealer, or yourself? We aren't talking about cars though so that one is imperfect. People are use to the idea that things will just work. While it would be nice if the hardware manufacturers would make drivers for everything, we know they won't. Is that Linux's fault? No. Is it their problem? Yes. Is it the users fault? Yes, they should have checked first just like they should if they are moving to Vista.
Re:Nope, it's the putative new users problem
on
Linux Needs Critics
·
· Score: 1
No, he's making the problem out to be one of users not checking the hardware compatibility list--something you need to do to upgrade to Vista, and to move to Linux.
Re:Nope, it's the putative new users problem
on
Linux Needs Critics
·
· Score: 1
No it doesn't work when you stick it into your Windows box--like he said. If you think every piece of hardware out there works with Windows out there then you don't have enough experience yet.
Re:Nope, it's the putative new users problem
on
Linux Needs Critics
·
· Score: 1
A good point--if over generalized--until "Sometimes people actually want to get something accomplished and not just play with their OS."
I don't tend to spend time playing with my OS, but then I use Gnome. KDE can sometimes be option centric--and some like it that way.
Re:Nope, it's the putative new users problem
on
Linux Needs Critics
·
· Score: 1
No OS supports every bit of hardware. Take the latest Vista release as your baseline here. Many folks upgraded their hardware to move to Vista.
All the money spent upgrading hardware for Vista not withstanding of course.
If I have a set of wheels and go out and buy a car only to find that the wheels don't fit, then I go back and complain, I deserve to be told that I should have done some research.
Sure you've visited some forums (slashdot, digg) where these battles go on in largely Linux related posts--like news about the latest kernel release--because Windows "fanboys" simply want to gripe about their failed attempt. These usually get piled upon and exchanges get heated on both sides.
Perhaps Windows users should stop getting mad when they fail to check their hardware for compatibility.
Nobody is "telling" him to switch. What is being said largely is "I like Linux, you might like it too." Sure there are some that think it is better for a lot of reasons which usually aren't really all that unique to Linux, but that is still not what you assert here.
Every post about Linux usually comes with plenty of Windows users complaining about it. Who really needs to live and let live here?
I don't see many Linux people saying it isn't their problem. The Linux Driver Project is one example, the steps Ubuntu has taken toward integrating proprietary drivers is another.
It is flatly wrong to assert that Linux folks are simply saying that its not their problem.
The US government and to a larger extent the military has been trending toward IT security in a large way these past few years. Getting Windows to stay secure between patches and upgrades has always been a huge nightmare--and before you start I'm not trying to assert it would be easier with [insert your favorite distro here].
If government were to set-up an agency whose charter were to maintain a standard government server and desktop OS and the software it would run then they could have more control over security. Obviously they couldn't do this unless they started with an open source OS such as Linux or BSD.
This certainly wouldn't be a Utopian approach--there would be tons of hurdles for everyone involved--but it would be better than the government assisting in building a corporate monopoly.
You can hire all the talent you want, but if you don't better define the need, you'll likely fail. You need to know more about what "Punch it up" means. Beyond that, what other marketing venues are in play and how does the site complement these. Getting local talent, whether a student or a pro will be more effective if you know more about what they are looking for. Tell the boss that the entire marketing approach needs to be considered as a whole.
For ADA compliance, look at contrast, not using color to convey meaning (ex: red items are priority), alt tags on images (reduce your use of images where possible), jump tags to get to (or past) navigation areas, avoid animation. These will get you close to compliance though there are some coding conventions you must adopt. There is plenty of good advice for the google aware to find.
For the artwork, you need to consider color choice first. Get the book Color Harmony ahref=http://www.amazon.com/Color-Harmony-Guide-Creative-Combinations/dp/1564960668rel=url2html-28773http://www.amazon.com/Color-Harmony-Guide-Creative-Combinations/dp/1564960668> to help decide on a scheme that supports the image the business wants to convey. Once the colors are chosen, do not deviate from them frivolously. A portal or a good css design will make these things easier and if you haven't looked there, do. One good use of an art student is to have a nice logo designed. The art of logo design seems easy enough but trust me on this, you'll save headaches later if you get someone who is trained, especially if the business grows.
On tools, Adobe makes the best but there are some great OS alternatives like Gimp, Krita, Inkscape and Xara Xtreme that are nipping at Adobe's heals.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think most Linux guys do #3, more like #2. Its the Windows folks that tend to do #3, then they run back to Windows.
No, again, you're missing the point. Nobody is asserting that you need to only buy hardware spec'd for Linux. The point he's making is that if you want to run Linux, you need to confirm your hardware works with it. Your analogy doesn't work here either. The one I used earlier might work better--if you own a set of wheels and go buy a car without first checking to see that your wheels will work, do you blame the car manufacturer, the dealer, or yourself? We aren't talking about cars though so that one is imperfect. People are use to the idea that things will just work. While it would be nice if the hardware manufacturers would make drivers for everything, we know they won't. Is that Linux's fault? No. Is it their problem? Yes. Is it the users fault? Yes, they should have checked first just like they should if they are moving to Vista.
No, he's making the problem out to be one of users not checking the hardware compatibility list--something you need to do to upgrade to Vista, and to move to Linux.
No it doesn't work when you stick it into your Windows box--like he said. If you think every piece of hardware out there works with Windows out there then you don't have enough experience yet.
A good point--if over generalized--until "Sometimes people actually want to get something accomplished and not just play with their OS." I don't tend to spend time playing with my OS, but then I use Gnome. KDE can sometimes be option centric--and some like it that way.
No OS supports every bit of hardware. Take the latest Vista release as your baseline here. Many folks upgraded their hardware to move to Vista.
All the money spent upgrading hardware for Vista not withstanding of course. If I have a set of wheels and go out and buy a car only to find that the wheels don't fit, then I go back and complain, I deserve to be told that I should have done some research. Sure you've visited some forums (slashdot, digg) where these battles go on in largely Linux related posts--like news about the latest kernel release--because Windows "fanboys" simply want to gripe about their failed attempt. These usually get piled upon and exchanges get heated on both sides. Perhaps Windows users should stop getting mad when they fail to check their hardware for compatibility.
Nobody is "telling" him to switch. What is being said largely is "I like Linux, you might like it too." Sure there are some that think it is better for a lot of reasons which usually aren't really all that unique to Linux, but that is still not what you assert here. Every post about Linux usually comes with plenty of Windows users complaining about it. Who really needs to live and let live here?
I don't see many Linux people saying it isn't their problem. The Linux Driver Project is one example, the steps Ubuntu has taken toward integrating proprietary drivers is another. It is flatly wrong to assert that Linux folks are simply saying that its not their problem.
The US government and to a larger extent the military has been trending toward IT security in a large way these past few years. Getting Windows to stay secure between patches and upgrades has always been a huge nightmare--and before you start I'm not trying to assert it would be easier with [insert your favorite distro here].
If government were to set-up an agency whose charter were to maintain a standard government server and desktop OS and the software it would run then they could have more control over security. Obviously they couldn't do this unless they started with an open source OS such as Linux or BSD.
This certainly wouldn't be a Utopian approach--there would be tons of hurdles for everyone involved--but it would be better than the government assisting in building a corporate monopoly.
You can hire all the talent you want, but if you don't better define the need, you'll likely fail. You need to know more about what "Punch it up" means. Beyond that, what other marketing venues are in play and how does the site complement these. Getting local talent, whether a student or a pro will be more effective if you know more about what they are looking for. Tell the boss that the entire marketing approach needs to be considered as a whole.
For ADA compliance, look at contrast, not using color to convey meaning (ex: red items are priority), alt tags on images (reduce your use of images where possible), jump tags to get to (or past) navigation areas, avoid animation. These will get you close to compliance though there are some coding conventions you must adopt. There is plenty of good advice for the google aware to find.
For the artwork, you need to consider color choice first. Get the book Color Harmony ahref=http://www.amazon.com/Color-Harmony-Guide-Creative-Combinations/dp/1564960668rel=url2html-28773http://www.amazon.com/Color-Harmony-Guide-Creative-Combinations/dp/1564960668> to help decide on a scheme that supports the image the business wants to convey. Once the colors are chosen, do not deviate from them frivolously. A portal or a good css design will make these things easier and if you haven't looked there, do. One good use of an art student is to have a nice logo designed. The art of logo design seems easy enough but trust me on this, you'll save headaches later if you get someone who is trained, especially if the business grows.
On tools, Adobe makes the best but there are some great OS alternatives like Gimp, Krita, Inkscape and Xara Xtreme that are nipping at Adobe's heals.