#1. User wants to install app that is in.deb format.
Debian already solves this fairly well. This also works really nice for upgrading and un-installing.
#2. User wants to install app that is in.rpm or some other PACKAGE format.
Alien does an okay job. But it would be nice to have some improvements. Again, upgrading and un-installing are handled.
#3. User wants to install app from tarball WITHOUT changing any of the tarball defaults.
Instead of using make and configure, why not have another app that calls them BUT monitors and RECORDS what was installed and where it was installed?
This will allow the app to be UN-installed, cleanly. But upgrading it will be a hassle.
#4. User wants to install from a tarball AND wants to change some of the defaults.
This looks like the hardest situation to handle. I don't know if there is a way to make this a "one-click" install.
But then, anyone wanting to do this is probably advanced enough to be able to handle it on their own.
Remember, a package management system should be able to INSTALL a package, UPGRADE a package, VERIFY and FIX a package, and UN-INSTALL a package.
Debian does VERY WELL with package management, but that is mostly because of the community that the maintainers belong to.
When you get away from that community (installing from source), you lose those benefits.
I think there are too many variables to be able to handle every case of installation from source code correctly (install, upgrade, verify, fix and un-install while allowing for a custom installation).
Instead, can we provide for the other cases and just issue a warning/notice that, since the installation was not done via a packaged app, the system cannot upgrade or verify/fix the app but can only install and remove it?
I think that will still give you an advantage over most Windows desktops.
Barratry means filing multiple cases to harass someone. Like if I drag you into court on some charge (real or not). Then I file another one against you. Then another one.
It would be VERY INTERESTING if SCO did file more claims and a judge ruled that SCO was attempting to harass "Linux".
People I know spend 50% of their at-home computer time surfing and reading mail and such.
The rest is spent playing games and such.
That means that Linux won't move into the home market until Linux gives those people what they want for the 50% of their time that isn't email, surfing, etc.
Games.
Yup. Microsoft is going to try ever trick it can to stop corporate deployments of Linux desktops.
Oh, I should include governmental deployments in that category, also.
Personally, I don't think Microsoft has a chance. It will be a long, bitter battle. But the economics just aren't there.
WinXP offers nothing for the end user that wasn't available with Win95. Microsoft has hit the wall in desktop "innovation".
Now it is all about software patents and crap like that.
Unless all you want to do is email, surf and write letters.
While this may be 50%+ of what most home users do, there is still the issue of games and new hardware, like you mentioned.
I'm still convinced that Linux will take over the corporate desktop before making major headway into the home market. And that all comes down to commercial demand for Linux drivers.
Once hardware vendors have to support Linux to get any corporate sales, we'll see an explosion of Linux drivers for hardware.
Once the hardware is supported, the home user will have that obstacle removed.
Then we will start seeing more games and junk programs on the store shelves.
Well, that's the way I see it. I could be wrong.
re: spyware I'm waiting for the flood of spam offering Linux services and crap.:)
****LEARN KERNEL OPTIMIZATION AT HOME*****
SEcRETS OF THE DEVELOPEERS!!!!!
$$$MAKE BIG MONEY WITH LINUX AT HOME$$$
ADV: WEBCAM HOT NAKED COEDS INSTALL DEBIAN
SINGLE WOMEN IN YOUR AREA $9.95/minute ANSWER YOUR LINUX QUESTIoNS!!!
But when you're a new Windows user, there are all kinds of people you know who have already been through the learning curve.
Not to mention that the machine you have probably already has Windows installed with all the toys working. You don't have to do much to work with your machine.
When you're learning Linux, it's more likely that you're the first one of the people you know and you'll be installing it on your machine.
Plus there are issues that you never had to deal with under Windows. The previous example had a problem where a symlink wasn't provided by the library package. This is something that Windows users have NEVER had to deal with. It's a completely foreign concept.
Linux User Groups (LUG's) can be a lot of help for the new Linux user.
But the biggest problem is learning a completely different operating system. Like you said, it is a step by step process.
I don't recommend that people take up Linux unless they have a friend willing to help them through the rough spots. Or they really feel confident that they can read a few books or take a class and do it on their own.
Unless they buy a pre-installed machine. Then I believe that anyone who can handle Windows can handle Linux.
An example of their helpfulness: http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue95/ lg_tips.html
Some quick words on why they WON'T help you: http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue95/lg_answe r.html
It's really easy for someone to get annoyed and start with the "RTFM" when they're innundated by people looking to have someone else do their work for them.
I've always found Linux people to be very supportive and helpful. But then I try to be very specific about what I want to accomplish and what I've tried and what errors are popping up.
But I've also found most Windows people to be the same way. They're very helpful, provided that I'm clear in my goal and my previous attempts and the specific errors I'm getting.
I guess the difference most people see is that they need more help, initially, with Linux than with Windows. So it's easier to become frustrated when people who have, themselves, become frustrated tell you to "RTFM".
The LARGEST is the corporate desktop. In this market you have dedicated support personnel, controlled hardware and software (ideally) and playing DVD's is NOT a requirement. Nor is 802.11g connectivity (see below).
A sub-category is the corporate laptop. Again, you have dedicated support personnel and controlled hardware and software.
He's is actually in a very, very small market. He is in The Home Laptop market. Your support is what you and your friends know and what info you can get from the vendor's support line. There is no control on what hardware or software that will be installed.
I see lots of problems on these machines. Our outside people treat their corporate laptops as personal machines (and we can't stop them under Windows) and they trash them regularly. All of a sudden, they won't shut down correctly (because they installed some stupid mouse pointer toy) and their VPN connection stops working (installed AOL to talk to buddies) and then it blue screens on boot and I have to search the Internet for the latest drivers.
Bite my butt!
Linux is ready for the CORPORATE desktop market.
Linux is ready for part of the HOME desktop market.
Until Linux hits 51% of the market, Linux will have problems with new hardware. That is simple economics from the hardware vendor's point-of-view.
First off, with a "problem" you also have to define the "goal" that this "problem" is hindering the achievement of.
We are * here. We want to be --------> here. The issue(s) stopping us is(are) whatever.
Right now, most of the Open Source stuff IS focused on the code.
That is what has resulted in such damn good code and the resultant security.
----------
Microsoft focuses on the "end-user experience".
As a result, they have some nasty security issues and really crappy code.
----------
So, given finite resources, would it be better to focus on the code or the "end-user experience"?
Again, that depends upon what your goals are.
How about we expand the pie a bit.
The developers can still focus on the code. That's what they do best.
The COMMERCIAL distributions can focus on making the interface prettier and marketing it.
That way, they don't impact the developers (goal - good code), but they still get the items needed to sell their product (goal - increased desktop share).
I've said before that I don't see anything wrong with a distribution focusing on ONE desktop and SINGLE apps. If this makes it easy for them to sell their product.
But I think we need to keep the distinction between developer's goals and distribution's goals (and the people in both groups).
Let each group do what it does best and don't claim that people from one group should stop what they're doing and work in the other group.
#1. Microsoft - 95%+ of the desktop so any vendor shipping a product also included Windows drivers.
#2. Apple - small marketshare so it compensates by restricting hardware selection. That way it can ensure that the drivers are available.
#3. Linux - small desktop marketshare but it doesn't attempt to limit the hardware choices. So YOU have to be carefull about what hardware you purchase. Some work flawlessly, some work okay, some suck bad, some don't work at all.
Now, the problems.
#1. Different vendors write drivers that MAY NOT WORK NICELY with other vendor's drivers. That's one of the reasons that you're told to "Remove the driver, re-install the driver, did that fix it?"
#2. Limited selection. What else can be said?
#3. Better than #1, but still problems with un-supported hardware drivers. The good news is you can easily identify and remove the evil drivers. The bad news is that those drivers might be for hardware that your really need.
His current article is a follow-up to a previous article about Linux NOT being ready for the desktop because it didn't work with his 802.11g card and wouldn't play DVD's "out of the box".
http://www.linuxworld.com/story/38038.htm
In that article, his solution was to award "kudos" (as you noted) for fixing the "problems" he claimed that rendered Linux "dead" on the desktop.
I believe that the real solution is to only purchase products from vendors that support Linux.
As for developers focusing on other aspects, that would be nice. But I'm not about to ask someone who is giving me their labour for free to work harder for my benefit.
I will contribute financially to projects and I will purchase Linux-friendly hardware and let the vendors know that I'm using it with Linux.
There are so many ways you can contribute to projects you deem worthwhile.
The problem is that the sex offenders give the WRONG ADDRESS -or- they give the right address and then move and their records are NOT updated.
So vigilantes go to that address and beat on whomever lives there.
If they want to publish the addresses in a PUBLICLY accessable medium, then they had better be putting in the man-hours to make sure that EVERY ADDRESS IS CORRECT.
I won't even go into the fact that the court system is NOT flawless and INNOCENT people are convicted of crimes.
This seems like nothing more than an attempt to get vigilantes to hand out the "justice" that the court system didn't.
On the other hand, if your address is published, incorrectly, and someone beats you up, I'd be looking for lawyers to get me a few $$$ million from the state.
He seemed to be one just because he was to the Left of his opponent.
Clinton was more of a moderate with some Left leanings.
The two instances you've cited are good examples of that.
Not that being a moderate is bad. I think we need more moderates in government. But I also think we need more liberals in government. Or more guts in the liberals that we have.
Slashdot Mirror
Various circumstances:
.deb format.
.rpm or some other PACKAGE format.
#1. User wants to install app that is in
Debian already solves this fairly well.
This also works really nice for upgrading and un-installing.
#2. User wants to install app that is in
Alien does an okay job. But it would be nice to have some improvements.
Again, upgrading and un-installing are handled.
#3. User wants to install app from tarball WITHOUT changing any of the tarball defaults.
Instead of using make and configure, why not have another app that calls them BUT monitors and RECORDS what was installed and where it was installed?
This will allow the app to be UN-installed, cleanly. But upgrading it will be a hassle.
#4. User wants to install from a tarball AND wants to change some of the defaults.
This looks like the hardest situation to handle. I don't know if there is a way to make this a "one-click" install.
But then, anyone wanting to do this is probably advanced enough to be able to handle it on their own.
Remember, a package management system should be able to INSTALL a package, UPGRADE a package, VERIFY and FIX a package, and UN-INSTALL a package.
Debian does VERY WELL with package management, but that is mostly because of the community that the maintainers belong to.
When you get away from that community (installing from source), you lose those benefits.
I think there are too many variables to be able to handle every case of installation from source code correctly (install, upgrade, verify, fix and un-install while allowing for a custom installation).
Instead, can we provide for the other cases and just issue a warning/notice that, since the installation was not done via a packaged app, the system cannot upgrade or verify/fix the app but can only install and remove it?
I think that will still give you an advantage over most Windows desktops.
They've only filed one legal case.
Just one.
They've said that they'd file more.
Lots more.
Maybe lots and lots more.
But they've only filed one so far.
Barratry means filing multiple cases to harass someone. Like if I drag you into court on some charge (real or not). Then I file another one against you. Then another one.
It would be VERY INTERESTING if SCO did file more claims and a judge ruled that SCO was attempting to harass "Linux".
People I know spend 50% of their at-home computer time surfing and reading mail and such.
The rest is spent playing games and such.
That means that Linux won't move into the home market until Linux gives those people what they want for the 50% of their time that isn't email, surfing, etc.
Games.
Yup. Microsoft is going to try ever trick it can to stop corporate deployments of Linux desktops.
Oh, I should include governmental deployments in that category, also.
Personally, I don't think Microsoft has a chance. It will be a long, bitter battle. But the economics just aren't there.
WinXP offers nothing for the end user that wasn't available with Win95. Microsoft has hit the wall in desktop "innovation".
Now it is all about software patents and crap like that.
Unless all you want to do is email, surf and write letters.
:)
While this may be 50%+ of what most home users do, there is still the issue of games and new hardware, like you mentioned.
I'm still convinced that Linux will take over the corporate desktop before making major headway into the home market. And that all comes down to commercial demand for Linux drivers.
Once hardware vendors have to support Linux to get any corporate sales, we'll see an explosion of Linux drivers for hardware.
Once the hardware is supported, the home user will have that obstacle removed.
Then we will start seeing more games and junk programs on the store shelves.
Well, that's the way I see it. I could be wrong.
re: spyware
I'm waiting for the flood of spam offering Linux services and crap.
****LEARN KERNEL OPTIMIZATION AT HOME*****
SEcRETS OF THE DEVELOPEERS!!!!!
$$$MAKE BIG MONEY WITH LINUX AT HOME$$$
ADV: WEBCAM HOT NAKED COEDS INSTALL DEBIAN
SINGLE WOMEN IN YOUR AREA $9.95/minute ANSWER YOUR LINUX QUESTIoNS!!!
If you wrote REALLY GOOD documentation. So good that other people at other projects asked you to help with their documentation.
Or if you did REALLY GOOD testing. So good that the developers would get your sign-off before releasing "stable" versions of their code.
And so on.
It's possible, but you have to put in a lot of effort and be really good at it.
But I don't think that many non-developers will be inclined to do so.
www.linuxgazette.com
Look up The Answer Gang. They don't have the recognition that Linus or Alan do, but their names are known because of their tech support.
Yup, there are usually restrictions based upon legacy applications that contain business data and/or logic.
We're currently looking at handling these via Citrix and moving to web-based systems.
His point would be more accurate if he said that Linux was not ready for the desktop because of those specialized, legacy apps.
But that would lead to the statement that Linux is ready for the corporate desktop, but not all corporations are ready for Linux on the desktop.
Yes/No?
But when you're a new Windows user, there are all kinds of people you know who have already been through the learning curve.
Not to mention that the machine you have probably already has Windows installed with all the toys working. You don't have to do much to work with your machine.
When you're learning Linux, it's more likely that you're the first one of the people you know and you'll be installing it on your machine.
Plus there are issues that you never had to deal with under Windows. The previous example had a problem where a symlink wasn't provided by the library package. This is something that Windows users have NEVER had to deal with. It's a completely foreign concept.
Linux User Groups (LUG's) can be a lot of help for the new Linux user.
But the biggest problem is learning a completely different operating system. Like you said, it is a step by step process.
I don't recommend that people take up Linux unless they have a friend willing to help them through the rough spots. Or they really feel confident that they can read a few books or take a class and do it on their own.
Unless they buy a pre-installed machine. Then I believe that anyone who can handle Windows can handle Linux.
http://www.linuxgazette.com
/ lg_tips.html
e r.html
An example of their helpfulness:
http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue95
Some quick words on why they WON'T help you:
http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue95/lg_answ
It's really easy for someone to get annoyed and start with the "RTFM" when they're innundated by people looking to have someone else do their work for them.
I've always found Linux people to be very supportive and helpful. But then I try to be very specific about what I want to accomplish and what I've tried and what errors are popping up.
But I've also found most Windows people to be the same way. They're very helpful, provided that I'm clear in my goal and my previous attempts and the specific errors I'm getting.
I guess the difference most people see is that they need more help, initially, with Linux than with Windows. So it's easier to become frustrated when people who have, themselves, become frustrated tell you to "RTFM".
He said Linux was NOT ready for the desktop.
But there are MULTIPLE desktop markets.
The LARGEST is the corporate desktop. In this market you have dedicated support personnel, controlled hardware and software (ideally) and playing DVD's is NOT a requirement. Nor is 802.11g connectivity (see below).
A sub-category is the corporate laptop. Again, you have dedicated support personnel and controlled hardware and software.
He's is actually in a very, very small market. He is in The Home Laptop market. Your support is what you and your friends know and what info you can get from the vendor's support line. There is no control on what hardware or software that will be installed.
I see lots of problems on these machines. Our outside people treat their corporate laptops as personal machines (and we can't stop them under Windows) and they trash them regularly. All of a sudden, they won't shut down correctly (because they installed some stupid mouse pointer toy) and their VPN connection stops working (installed AOL to talk to buddies) and then it blue screens on boot and I have to search the Internet for the latest drivers.
Bite my butt!
Linux is ready for the CORPORATE desktop market.
Linux is ready for part of the HOME desktop market.
Until Linux hits 51% of the market, Linux will have problems with new hardware. That is simple economics from the hardware vendor's point-of-view.
First off, with a "problem" you also have to define the "goal" that this "problem" is hindering the achievement of.
We are * here.
We want to be --------> here.
The issue(s) stopping us is(are) whatever.
Right now, most of the Open Source stuff IS focused on the code.
That is what has resulted in such damn good code and the resultant security.
----------
Microsoft focuses on the "end-user experience".
As a result, they have some nasty security issues and really crappy code.
----------
So, given finite resources, would it be better to focus on the code or the "end-user experience"?
Again, that depends upon what your goals are.
How about we expand the pie a bit.
The developers can still focus on the code. That's what they do best.
The COMMERCIAL distributions can focus on making the interface prettier and marketing it.
That way, they don't impact the developers (goal - good code), but they still get the items needed to sell their product (goal - increased desktop share).
I've said before that I don't see anything wrong with a distribution focusing on ONE desktop and SINGLE apps. If this makes it easy for them to sell their product.
But I think we need to keep the distinction between developer's goals and distribution's goals (and the people in both groups).
Let each group do what it does best and don't claim that people from one group should stop what they're doing and work in the other group.
Objections?
If people want something, and none of the developers see it as important enough to "scratch", then those people have another option.
Pay someone to write/fix the code to their satisfaction.
It's the user-participation that makes Open Source so great.
Money == Time + Effort
You have access to the developers and the lists. Offer money and see if that changes the situation.
This isn't ego. There are only so many developers with so much time.
They have to prioritize their work accourding to their desires.
Christmas is coming. Buy them a DVD or something to show your appreciation.
Offer them money to help with your problem.
This isn't elitism.
I'm sure there are lots of developers who would, given an unlimited amount of time, help each person with their specific problems.
But there isn't an unlimited amount of time for a developer.
Three entirely different worlds.
#1. Microsoft - 95%+ of the desktop so any vendor shipping a product also included Windows drivers.
#2. Apple - small marketshare so it compensates by restricting hardware selection. That way it can ensure that the drivers are available.
#3. Linux - small desktop marketshare but it doesn't attempt to limit the hardware choices. So YOU have to be carefull about what hardware you purchase. Some work flawlessly, some work okay, some suck bad, some don't work at all.
Now, the problems.
#1. Different vendors write drivers that MAY NOT WORK NICELY with other vendor's drivers. That's one of the reasons that you're told to "Remove the driver, re-install the driver, did that fix it?"
#2. Limited selection. What else can be said?
#3. Better than #1, but still problems with un-supported hardware drivers. The good news is you can easily identify and remove the evil drivers. The bad news is that those drivers might be for hardware that your really need.
He's beta testing the new develeopment kernel.
I can't wait for 6.2.0 to come out. What with the telepathic user interface and all.
His current article is a follow-up to a previous article about Linux NOT being ready for the desktop because it didn't work with his 802.11g card and wouldn't play DVD's "out of the box".
http://www.linuxworld.com/story/38038.htm
In that article, his solution was to award "kudos" (as you noted) for fixing the "problems" he claimed that rendered Linux "dead" on the desktop.
I believe that the real solution is to only purchase products from vendors that support Linux.
As for developers focusing on other aspects, that would be nice. But I'm not about to ask someone who is giving me their labour for free to work harder for my benefit.
I will contribute financially to projects and I will purchase Linux-friendly hardware and let the vendors know that I'm using it with Linux.
There are so many ways you can contribute to projects you deem worthwhile.
#1. Help with the code.
#2. Money - always appreciated.
#3. Testing & submitting GOOD bug reports.
#4. Helping with documentation.
#5. Maintaining your own "HowTo" for your system.
etc.
#2.
Well, I'm sure it is IF you know what the BEST solution is AHEAD OF TIME.
For mere mortals, there will be more than one approach. Then we are free to choose whichever approach is the "best" for us.
As for it being the 'wrong' itch, that is up to the developer to determine.
Sure, it isn't what YOU want them to work on. But that's what this 'Freedom' thing is about.
I'm just positive that if you were in charge everything would be much more efficient and successful.
Get over yourself.
This is Open Source.
If your ideas AND your implementation are better, people will switch to your products.
Go ahead. Show your code.
I am looking outside the window.
What I'm wondering is WHO in the EU would even consider allowing the US that kind of access.
I understand the US wanting it.
I understand the US bringing whatever political/economic pressure it can to get its way.
I do NOT understand anyone in the EU even considering allowing this.
This is the US. We'll demand just about anything in the name of "security".
The EU needs to stand up for its own national interests and say "No".
If it isn't any more accurate than the US system?
If it can be disabled by the US, just like the US system?
In effect, they will be using a US-controlled system.
So it would be more in their national interest to put up their own. Even if it costs more.
The only case I'm aware of is where some guy's ex-wife or girlfriend went to the cops and filed a complaint against him.
He was tried, convicted and did time in jail.
I remember seeing on the news about 10 years ago. I can't find an Internet citation.
Mod parent up.
I'm more worried about innocent people getting on that list.
8 1_wenbox01 .shtml
Do a google search on Wenatchee "child molestation"
Here's a nice example:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/334
One loony cop and a fucked up legal system and you have hundreds of charges of sex crimes.
I don't trust the government enough to get the correct information on those sites.
There are people who take up crime because the rewards, to them, out weigh the risks.
Take the Enron execs for example.
Or, if that is too difficult, take a drug dealer. Lots of money, respect and women.
http://www.sodomylaws.org/sensibilities/federal.ht m
Don't forget pandering and prostitution and so forth.
The problem is NOT the sex offenders.
The problem is that the sex offenders give the WRONG ADDRESS
-or-
they give the right address and then move and their records are NOT updated.
So vigilantes go to that address and beat on whomever lives there.
If they want to publish the addresses in a PUBLICLY accessable medium, then they had better be putting in the man-hours to make sure that EVERY ADDRESS IS CORRECT.
I won't even go into the fact that the court system is NOT flawless and INNOCENT people are convicted of crimes.
This seems like nothing more than an attempt to get vigilantes to hand out the "justice" that the court system didn't.
On the other hand, if your address is published, incorrectly, and someone beats you up, I'd be looking for lawyers to get me a few $$$ million from the state.
He seemed to be one just because he was to the Left of his opponent.
Clinton was more of a moderate with some Left leanings.
The two instances you've cited are good examples of that.
Not that being a moderate is bad. I think we need more moderates in government. But I also think we need more liberals in government. Or more guts in the liberals that we have.
We haven't had a terrorist attack on the continental US since then.
But we have had many, Many, MANY terrorist attacks on US citizens in Iraq and Afghanistan and so on.
"Terrorist" attacks against the US (as defined to include US citizens) is at an all time HIGH.
There almost isn't a day that goes by without 10 or more "terrorist" attacks.
How many attacks in 2000?
How many in 2001?
How many in 2002?
In 2003, there have been over a THOUSAND.