If I tell you that I want to hear what you have to say about specific problems, you will likely (from past observation of comments like yours) respond that you want to be a user and not a developer, or that if Free software is so great, they should have figured this out by now.
If I tell you that I disagree, I am "part of the problem" or an elitist.
If I tell you that in some cases I agree, but that I think the problems are surmountable and being actively worked on then you tell me that you don't want to have to chase.x versions of software.
If I say that you are a troll who is making overbroad generalisations without backing them up with even a single example, and attempting to abuse the moderation system with ultra-lame reverse psychology then, I'd be right, but it wouldn't really help anything.
ack, apparently I can't use any interface, so take anything I say with a huge grain of salt. (the submit button submits the post, can you believe that?)
I'll have to recreate them here, but my other points were (some of the problems can't be seen from the screenshots)
The ui of fetchmailconf is completely different from any other mail configuration program I have ever seen. (yes, IMO very different == less usable)
It suffers from the usability problem of "configuration modes" - advanced/beginner mode.
It segments the parts of the dialog very strangely
Poll interval is to be entered in unspecified units
If you click edit, it pops up an error telling you to select an item from the (empty) list.
I'll stop there, there is really a lot wrong with the program. I'm guessing you have never used the program, but it is definitely not a shining example of usability, not just due to its use of tkinter.
I submit that it *would* confuse an inexperienced user. I personally found it easier to sit down and read the man page for fetchmail. This is not because I love me a conf file, but becuase I tried fetchmailconf, and was confused by it.
Take a look again and tell me why
#1 There are ok/quit/save buttons at the top and what they apply to,
Very ominous, Mr. Jerzey. I'm sure it will make all the MS fanboys happy to know that magical security is coming Real Soon Now. That'll show those lunix weenies!
You can write insecure code in any language at all (duh).
Just double-checked and it does let you open it, but only after you save it. The message it gives if you "Launch file" is
"Warning! Executable file may contain viruses or other malicious code that could harm your computer. Use caution when opening this file. Are you sure you want to launch r00tm3h4rd.exe?"
Which is just silly, because everyone knows that should be virii.
I would guess that a very large percentage of users these days use web mail. IE definitely doesn't prevent opening.exe files. Neither does Firebird, but it does give you a little "this is your own fault" speech first:-/
Also, there are a number of third-party applications that "integrate" with Outlook (for no particularly good reason usually) and that typically requires many of Outlook's new security features to be disabled.
(This is of course not taking into account that not everyone upgrades their systems at the same frequency as yourself)
> This is sad. Last I knew, Windows won out due to > inertia as well, not technical reasons, and we > condemn it for that. Must we be hypocritical a > second time around?
Don't forget though, that linux "winning" != freebsd "losing"
Right now, linux/bsd are obviously Not Windows when it comes to the PHBs. If linux makes it to top-of-the-heap, freebsd is right there in line behind it. It may irk you that linux is not right behind freebsd instead, but don't pull down the friendly competition in the attack against the opposition. This town is big enough for the both of us;-)
>But I stand by the claim that untill program X >easily doubleclick installs and does not require >any sort of knowledge of bash, unix principles of >configfiles to be run at full capacity it isn't >really userfriendly, it is merely paying lip >service to it and assuming that all serious users >will and should learn the "good old ways".
So you're standing by a claim you hadn't previously made... very nice:-)
Your actual claim was that the situation that you describe above A) exists and B) is what the developers consider correct. I call BS on both counts. (you also failed to provide a single example)
>The greatest problem with Linux adoption is that >developers want windows users to learn *nix
Please back up this claim with even a little bit of evidence. Some of the *users* (especially the vocal group here on/.) exhibit that elitist attitude, but to paint the developers with the same brush is quite rude.
If the goal of the developers of Gnome and KDE was to make unix more difficult for users and developers, they are not doing a very good job.
I'm guessing it's for the same reason that just removing the iexplore.exe executable on windows doesn't satisfy a lot of people's requirements for removal of IE. If it's still there, it's still considered supported.
Using Opera as an example, statically-linked QT adds about 1.3 Meg to the app size. If it's that important for someone to use qt, statically link.
While this software may work well enough to be relied upon as your primary browser, we make no guarantees of its performance or stability in its pre-1.0 state and it should not be relied upon for mission- critical tasks
Seems like a pretty good disincentive for basing your platform on it.
There is no irony here, only pragmatism. Bruce has made it clear that he wants to leverage Debian's huge developer and (high-quality) package base. That is esential, because starting from scratch is just not logical. That makes linux/debian the practical solution.
He also wants to make development for proprietary software as easy as possible. Two separate goals. It just so happens that those two goals lead to different licenses at either end. BFD.
> The first thing UserLinux needs to fix is its own name
They are. That name is only a placeholder.
> If UserLinux was an end user-oriented > distribution, it surely had to pick KDE instead of > Gnome, since KDE is the more integrated and stable > GUI and is less messy in the architecture > underneath
I'm curious why you say that. My initial instinct, since I have looked at both is to dismiss you outright, but to give the benefit of the doubt, what technical aspects make Gnome's architecture "messy"?
> while Gnome/GTK has the lead in 3rd-party > applications and, since recently, UI polish
Isn't that what users actually care about? It seems from your own argument that you should object more to them calling it DeveloperLinux, although even the basis for that claim is unsupported in your "argument"...
Yes, because all the thousands of slashdot readers/posters have only one point of view...
Find specific instances of people who are ok with violations of the RIAA's copyright but not with violations of Linux's copyright and then you will have something to say.
Saying "many think X and many think not-X" proves nothing without showing an overlap between the groups.
Citrix ICA has a very stringent license-management system, allowing licensed applications to be served remotely only to licensed clients, and only to a limited number at a time. This is important for software publishers... they don't want groups of people to buy 1 license and serve it for all their friends.
I think you are confusing Citrix's (metaframe's) own licensing with the licensing of the applications it "shares out." Citrix will not manage your MS Office, or any other application's licenses for you, it manages citrix licenses, that's all. I'm not sure where you get the idea that it does so.
X's licensing management can be considered akin to having an infinite number of metaframe licenses.
maybe it'd be worthwhile to think about license protection mechanisms for X applications...
Let those applications manage their own licenses. I, for one, am constantly annoyed at how much software is written for the sole purpose of "license management" and I can't think that too many people are interested in writing free license management software, not to mention that vendors are not going to rely on license management software that is a recompile away from wide-open.
This is great to hear. Up till now, even though X has had remote display abilities built-in, it has not been at all practical to replace something like ICA or even RDP. The next step though is to get thin client manufacturers (maybe neoware's linux-based models?) to support this protocol natively. The article doesn't mention how large the libraries required for NX are, but hopefully it is something that could be added to existing thin clients.
Along with that step, it would be great to see "shadowing" support, which has been one of the killer support features of Metaframe (and now TS). The neoware devices have built in tightvnc, but it is not quite as good as ICA/RDP shadowing (NX probably wouldn't have been necessary if it was)
This blathering is getting old. The KDE and Gnome guys are already working together to increase interoperability between the projects.
If you are interested, go to freedesktop.org. If you are just a whiner who wants to tell others how to spend their own time, write a long uninformed article pretending to be some sort of "expert"
All the desktop projects are not going to merge behind "one true vision" because they have different goals. period. How complicated is that?
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who responds to this sort of post loses.
.x versions of software.
If I tell you that I want to hear what you have to say about specific problems, you will likely (from past observation of comments like yours) respond that you want to be a user and not a developer, or that if Free software is so great, they should have figured this out by now.
If I tell you that I disagree, I am "part of the problem" or an elitist.
If I tell you that in some cases I agree, but that I think the problems are surmountable and being actively worked on then you tell me that you don't want to have to chase
If I say that you are a troll who is making overbroad generalisations without backing them up with even a single example, and attempting to abuse the moderation system with ultra-lame reverse psychology then, I'd be right, but it wouldn't really help anything.
What is your suggestion?
-Mark
ack, apparently I can't use any interface, so take anything I say with a huge grain of salt. (the submit button submits the post, can you believe that?)
I'll have to recreate them here, but my other points were
(some of the problems can't be seen from the screenshots)
The ui of fetchmailconf is completely different from any other mail configuration program I have ever seen. (yes, IMO very different == less usable)
It suffers from the usability problem of "configuration modes" - advanced/beginner mode.
It segments the parts of the dialog very strangely
Poll interval is to be entered in unspecified units
If you click edit, it pops up an error telling you to select an item from the (empty) list.
I'll stop there, there is really a lot wrong with the program. I'm guessing you have never used the program, but it is definitely not a shining example of usability, not just due to its use of tkinter.
-Mark
I submit that it *would* confuse an inexperienced user. I personally found it easier to sit down and read the man page for fetchmail. This is not because I love me a conf file, but becuase I tried fetchmailconf, and was confused by it.
Take a look again and tell me why
#1 There are ok/quit/save buttons at the top and what they apply to,
If you want good interface design, look no further than ESR's own beautifully designed fetchmailconf.
Not to say that he doesn't make good points, but... well... just look at the screenshots.
-Mark
Very ominous, Mr. Jerzey. I'm sure it will make all the MS fanboys happy to know that magical security is coming Real Soon Now. That'll show those lunix weenies!
You can write insecure code in any language at all (duh).
-Mark
> So what does Gnome do...
> they begin to based on Mono. Nuts.
They do? Which modules? (Hint: they don't. none.)
-Mark
Did you say PUSH?!?! Who do I make my check out to?
<giggles with glee over the cash cow that is push technology>
-Mark
Just double-checked and it does let you open it, but only after you save it. The message it gives if you "Launch file" is
"Warning! Executable file may contain viruses or other malicious code that could harm your computer. Use caution when opening this file. Are you sure you want to launch r00tm3h4rd.exe?"
Which is just silly, because everyone knows that should be virii.
(Don't hurt me, Latin nazis. It's a joke)
-Mark
I would guess that a very large percentage of users these days use web mail. IE definitely doesn't prevent opening .exe files. Neither does Firebird, but it does give you a little "this is your own fault" speech first :-/
Also, there are a number of third-party applications that "integrate" with Outlook (for no particularly good reason usually) and that typically requires many of Outlook's new security features to be disabled.
(This is of course not taking into account that not everyone upgrades their systems at the same frequency as yourself)
-Mark
You mean like "dpkg --get-selections" and "tar"?
-Mark
> This is sad. Last I knew, Windows won out due to
;-)
> inertia as well, not technical reasons, and we
> condemn it for that. Must we be hypocritical a
> second time around?
Don't forget though, that linux "winning" != freebsd "losing"
Right now, linux/bsd are obviously Not Windows when it comes to the PHBs. If linux makes it to top-of-the-heap, freebsd is right there in line behind it. It may irk you that linux is not right behind freebsd instead, but don't pull down the friendly competition in the attack against the opposition. This town is big enough for the both of us
-Mark
>But I stand by the claim that untill program X
:-)
>easily doubleclick installs and does not require
>any sort of knowledge of bash, unix principles of
>configfiles to be run at full capacity it isn't
>really userfriendly, it is merely paying lip
>service to it and assuming that all serious users
>will and should learn the "good old ways".
So you're standing by a claim you hadn't previously made... very nice
Your actual claim was that the situation that you describe above A) exists and B) is what the developers consider correct. I call BS on both counts. (you also failed to provide a single example)
-Mark
>The greatest problem with Linux adoption is that
/.) exhibit that elitist attitude, but to paint the developers with the same brush is quite rude.
>developers want windows users to learn *nix
Please back up this claim with even a little bit of evidence. Some of the *users* (especially the vocal group here on
If the goal of the developers of Gnome and KDE was to make unix more difficult for users and developers, they are not doing a very good job.
-Mark
Install your distro's locales package. Then from your login manager: kdm, gdm etc pick the desired language.
-Mark
I'm guessing it's for the same reason that just removing the iexplore.exe executable on windows doesn't satisfy a lot of people's requirements for removal of IE. If it's still there, it's still considered supported.
Using Opera as an example, statically-linked QT adds about 1.3 Meg to the app size. If it's that important for someone to use qt, statically link.
-Mark
I think the following should be considered:
(from http://www.mozilla.org/products/firebird)
Mozilla Firebird is a Technology Preview.
While this software may work well enough to be relied upon as your primary browser, we make no guarantees of its performance or stability in its pre-1.0 state and it should not be relied upon for mission- critical tasks
Seems like a pretty good disincentive for basing your platform on it.
-Mark
There is no irony here, only pragmatism. Bruce has made it clear that he wants to leverage Debian's huge developer and (high-quality) package base. That is esential, because starting from scratch is just not logical. That makes linux/debian the practical solution.
He also wants to make development for proprietary software as easy as possible. Two separate goals. It just so happens that those two goals lead to different licenses at either end. BFD.
-Mark
> The first thing UserLinux needs to fix is its own name
They are. That name is only a placeholder.
> If UserLinux was an end user-oriented
> distribution, it surely had to pick KDE instead of
> Gnome, since KDE is the more integrated and stable
> GUI and is less messy in the architecture
> underneath
I'm curious why you say that. My initial instinct, since I have looked at both is to dismiss you outright, but to give the benefit of the doubt, what technical aspects make Gnome's architecture "messy"?
> while Gnome/GTK has the lead in 3rd-party
> applications and, since recently, UI polish
Isn't that what users actually care about? It seems from your own argument that you should object more to them calling it DeveloperLinux, although even the basis for that claim is unsupported in your "argument"...
-Mark
Because the GPL is only a distribution license. The user can link against whatever they want. That's why proprietary kernel modules are ok.
-Mark
Yes, because all the thousands of slashdot readers/posters have only one point of view...
Find specific instances of people who are ok with violations of the RIAA's copyright but not with violations of Linux's copyright and then you will have something to say.
Saying "many think X and many think not-X" proves nothing without showing an overlap between the groups.
bonehead.
-Mark
I think you are confusing Citrix's (metaframe's) own licensing with the licensing of the applications it "shares out." Citrix will not manage your MS Office, or any other application's licenses for you, it manages citrix licenses, that's all. I'm not sure where you get the idea that it does so.
X's licensing management can be considered akin to having an infinite number of metaframe licenses.
Let those applications manage their own licenses. I, for one, am constantly annoyed at how much software is written for the sole purpose of "license management" and I can't think that too many people are interested in writing free license management software, not to mention that vendors are not going to rely on license management software that is a recompile away from wide-open.
-Mark
This is great to hear. Up till now, even though X has had remote display abilities built-in, it has not been at all practical to replace something like ICA or even RDP. The next step though is to get thin client manufacturers (maybe neoware's linux-based models?) to support this protocol natively. The article doesn't mention how large the libraries required for NX are, but hopefully it is something that could be added to existing thin clients.
Along with that step, it would be great to see "shadowing" support, which has been one of the killer support features of Metaframe (and now TS). The neoware devices have built in tightvnc, but it is not quite as good as ICA/RDP shadowing (NX probably wouldn't have been necessary if it was)
-Mark
Oh, I should also point out, that selecting across databases/servers is listed in their urgent features in the postgresql todo list:
http://developer.postgresql.org/todo.php
Not easy to see, verbatim, what queries are running. Well, nothing i've seen so far. :\
Try adding
stats_command_string = true to your postgresql.conf
then, "select * from pg_stat_activity" for a list of users pids and queries
-Mark
This blathering is getting old. The KDE and Gnome guys are already working together to increase interoperability between the projects.
If you are interested, go to freedesktop.org. If you are just a whiner who wants to tell others how to spend their own time, write a long uninformed article pretending to be some sort of "expert"
All the desktop projects are not going to merge behind "one true vision" because they have different goals. period. How complicated is that?
-Mark