Guess who will have to pay the damages if the supreme court appeal fails?
For him there is no appeal now, the verdict is final. Which I think with 99% probability means we'll never hear from him again because he's either dead or disappeared, I won't speculate in which but I'd be extremely surprised if he should ever reappear.
Am I the only one disturbed that the word "freedom" apparently has negative connotations?
It sounds a bit much like liberate when most companies don't see themselves as captives. It's more over the top than anything else. OpenOffice is a rather ideal name in my opinion, that it's open (source) and that it's an office (suite). Well minus the ".org" that they had to add for some trademark reason, meh.
Even if we assume they're both tainted with devious Chinese spyware (and I'm not sure that China would want to harm such a huge and valuable debtor, by the way) which of these sounds like a bigger threat:
I don't think you should ever try to predict what can happen with alliances and defense pacts, surprise attacks and whatnot. It's not like the US pre-WWII would predict they'd be at war with Italy and Japan, possibly Germany but even that is doubtful. If say India and Pakistan or the Middle East start a war it can easily escalate into WWIII with US and China on opposing sides. I don't for one second buy that we're "beyond" war. Besides, there's a small causality loop there, when people are sure the opposition won't declare war that is when they're likely to act in such an arrogant and aggressive manner that it does lead to war.
1. A large Chinese-built wireless network which the government can monitor or shut down with relative ease.
Except that if you're in a state of war shutting down so you can't mobilize is a rather bad thing. But that's much less of a worry than the possibility of backdoors to tap into communications or inject mis-communication. It's easy to say we'll have alternatives but if they're not used they'll go away. For example less and less people have landlines, cables buried into the ground you can run from bunkers. In a war cell phone towers are like homing beacons for missiles, they're likely to be the first to go and all the people that rely on cell phones for communication will be out of reach. Sure, there's VoIP but is the Internet operational? Does everybody have headsets? Can you find all the numbers you need to call there? Even if the phones are compromised, people will quickly start using those that work. If the whole system is down, then you're screwed big time.
While I mostly agree, I am happy for the opportunity to hit the emergency brake and find a McDonalds when the local cuisine is creating havoc on my system. If I'm not feeling well then none of the other cultural or other experiences make fun. But if McDonalds is their choice on day one, get better friends...
And if you didn't want him gossiping with your neighbours about your shopping habits, you could always go to the next town. Now the shopkeeper in the next town (who's never even met you) knows all about your preferences for honey, blue stockings, ribbed condoms, and 12-year-old Scotch before you get there.
Actually, he won't have a clue. As far as I understand it, this system just tracks a cell phone's frequency slot. The moment you enter another cell tower's area your frequency will change with no way of tracking it and if you come back you'll have a different frequency slot. It only works for mapping out the path that cell phone took through your mall, very little else. But that wouldn't be sensationalist enough.
All you're saying is in theory true, except AMD has a ton of internal code that does this. If they were forced to deal with the GPL by external code they'd probably not use it at all, just a stripped down version of catalyst or the AMD-written parts of the Linux driver or a combination thereof.
It's not as simply as just seeing the benefit, actually getting it through the legal clearing process takes a lot of time and resources. And they don't even always say yes, there's a lot of headaches and holdups there. I doubt they'd impose the same conditions on their WEC7 driver if they could avoid it - and they can.
And the reality distortion field is still fully operational.
That's not so strange, since I assume all the essential strategy decisions going into the iPhone 4GS was done while Jobs was still in charge. It's the next iPhone that has to fight against the ghost of Jobs, where everyone will question if Apple will be the same without him. It's possible that Cook will be held some impossible standard where anything and everything would have been better if Jobs was still there.
Until it mutates into something that's not so restricted, and if it then has huge food sources it can devour alone it'll spread like wildfire. On a much less sci-fi note, a true global pandemic is still one of those really scary scenarios despite all the hype. If it first spirals out of control and you have people fleeing everywhere breaking quarantine it could get really, really nasty.
The problem is, Science is incomplete: is is _unable_ to answer these types of questions so it it hand-waves them as being "unimportant."
Not unimportant, just that it is impossible to narrow down the possible explanations. Each religion tends to give one answer, but none can be shown to be right and the others wrong. If anyone is handwaving, then it's the religions trying to prove what can't be proven.
That said, most of the world religions do make claims in their religious tests that can be scientifically tested and proven wrong. Unfortunately there's a whole lot of unscientific explanations for this, including "This text is an allegory", "It's a test of faith", "It was written by his disciples" and "It's simplified to their level". No matter if specific claims like the earth being the center of the universe are conceded, the religion lives on.
Yeah, though sometimes I think Apple has it easier because they don't promote technical excellency as their strength. Like for example the iPhone antenna problems, the market mostly shrugged and kept using iPhones because they're intuitive and people figure out how to use them. If on the other hand you bought your phone because it supports triband dual UTMS 4G or whatever, then the antenna not working properly is like disaster. Yes, the 4GS has faster CPU, faster graphics, improved camera and doubled some transfer speed but the buzz, what I hear everybody is talking about is Siri. As long as that is working, I think they'd be willing to forgive any lesser technical oversights.
The one he's weighed in on is that the position will not be configurable, it'll be on your left and you'll like it. The only possible exception are RTL countries, but there everything will switch from left to right. What I don't like is the clear WONTFIX and the reasoning:
A willingness to limit the set of supported options is a large part of the quality of the out-of-box desktop experience. For example, the old Gnome Panel was designed with the goal of making many, many things possible. you could put them on any edge of the screen, you could write any sort of app, that supported any sort of interface pattern. And the result was very, very hard to use well. All of that customization made it impossible to provide an "overall feeling" to the old Gnome Panel.
Out of the box means out of the box. If you start making all sorts of changes, that's no longer the out of the box experience but the customized experience. That you take away configurability and customization options doesn't mean the out of the box experience gets any better, it just means you no longer has a choice. Sounds like he's been taking lessons from the Gnome developers. At least he's clear on that he will consider external patches to implement it, he just won't put Canonical staff on it.
Well there's two meanings: Q: Why does the apple fall to the ground? A: Gravity
Q: Yes, you've named the force and given me a formula to calculate it but why does the apple fall to the ground? A: We don't know, and even if we ever find something more fundamental that explains gravity, then that again won't have a "why".
Science explains the "how", when you derive it from other things we often say "why". But if you want turtles all the way down, there's no "why", no reason the universe is this way and not some other way. It's purely descriptive of the way it is.
If Einstein had not developed Relativity, someone else would have, so I guess we can just sort of ignore or make light his contributions to physics on/. to make ourselves look kewl.
The assertion was more like if it wasn't for Einstein, we'd still not know about relativity. It's an often asked question in history, how essential was that singular person or would the conditions produce the same results regardless. We have many cases of parallel inventions where say Daimler and Benz both invented the automobile, or where many in addition to Bell was about to invent the telephone. In other cases one person opened up a field nobody else realize existed and could have gone unnoticed for decades or potentially longer. With all respect to Dennis Ritchie, there was a lot of parallel development of programming languages. It's not like we'd all be stuck in the 70s if he hadn't invented C.
Maybe because all seems at this point to be based on one Google+ post and slashdot is a bit wary of such announcements, with the Stephen King trolls and all...
Newell reiterated his concerns about a closed model being the 'wrong philosophical approach' --- I guess that means he doesnt like the idea of this happening any more than i do then...
Also called "a market Steam doesn't have access to". So far consoles have been mostly for AAA games, while Apple has been letting almost everyone and their dog sell through the app store. If Apple makes a console that attracts a lot of smaller, independent developers who need a distribution method and steal them from the PC market then Steam will lose a lot of business. So I'm not sure his interests are so philosophical.
They may have the software library but all those windows games depend on windows. Valve would have to do something profoundly do to more than be a kiosk application on top of that and Microsoft would likely be highly uncooperative since it'd be a direct competitor with their xbox. Apple on the other hand has the whole stack and experience with hardware production and distribution. Basically it'd be repurposing something like the Mac Mini into an entertainment center, maybe with beefier graphics.
This. If I buy a piece of stolen art, hang it on my wall for 50 years then try to sell it, can the original owners demand to get it back? Hell yes. The only exception to this would be if somehow under some legal theory that they didn't call the cops on him to recover it sooner means they've abandoned it. But that doesn't seem very likely.
VMWare Workstation would still run fine with 1 or 2 guests without VT-d, wouldn't it?
Depends on what you're doing, VT-d is virtualized IO. Both have VT-x so CPU-intensive clients should run just fine with or without it, but disk access will be slower without it. But in my experience running virtualization without it, it's not that slow anyway.
The prices of the Intel ten core stuff is insane on the level of if you have to ask you can't afford it as an example in server space. Meanwhile there are slightly slower AMD 12 core CPUs for under $1000.
Intel's most expensive chip is $4616, AMDs is $2649. True you get AMD chips to under $1000, but then it's no longer very fair to compare them to Intel's most expensive ones either. The 10-cores are more like the Extreme Edition chips, which despite having two cores less perform much higher than the fastest Opteron...
The i7 2600K has all of the bells and whistles enabled. Except maybe ECC memory...
No, it doesn't have VT-d or TXT enabled, the 2600 - not the K - does though. It less for a fraction less, has slightly worse integrated graphics and is multiplier locked, it's basically the business version of the 2600K. And like you say, if you want ECC you must get Xeons.
AMD had a real good run in the early 2000's AMD actually was selling more PC's with its chips then Intel. Then Intel Core 2 Duo processors came out and AMD had to go back to catch up mode again.
I'm pretty sure they didn't and it was just a majority of the retail sales outside the big OEMs. I don't ever think AMD ever had the fab capacity to supply over 50% of the total market.
Sorry, but even though the reviews try not to kill the underdog this chip is huge, hot, performs crap in anything but extremely well threaded applications and even there it barely competes with Intel's 2500K/2600K. Anandtech passed 300W trying to overclock this beast. It's like AMD implemented every bad idea Intel had with the PIV.
They'll do strategic things for a while, but if the margin per wafer doesn't show up pretty soon, they kill the experiment. (Speaking of strategic, here's a fun game: The next time a salesman (or marketroid) tries to convince you to do some deal because "it's strategic", respond with "Oh, you mean it's no revenue." Enjoy deer-in-headlights face.)
Isn't that pretty much the definition of strategic? We're not great at making these kinds of products today, we lack the customer base, the experience and reputation. So we do projects at break-even or even possibly a slight loss in order to break into the market, because it's our strategy that we want to become an established player. If a) we aren't able to establish us or b) we do and there's still no profits then we don't keep doing what doesn't work.
I can't imagine which one you are talking about, but it's not one that I've ever seen.
Okay, don't get me wrong... it's far from certain anything will get fixed, but most of the time you get good lip service. The people in the support forums don't bitch at you for wanting support because that's what they're being paid to give. And even though your bug report might be filed into the nearest black hole, they tend to acknowledge that bugs are their problem, they can't boomerang it around on you and tell you to go fix it yourself. Only they have the source code, only they can fix it. It might end up as a low-priority bug that's left to rot but ultimately at some level they want customers satisfied enough - or locked in enough, yet not sucking so badly you switch anyway - that they buy the next upgrade. And what you tell other potential customers, because they want sales.
Voting with your wallet isn't a perfect system, but most companies work to satisfy those who pay their bills. Of course if you're just one of many, many paying customers your voice is tiny. In open source you have the power to trump all that make a patch, regardless if it's important for anyone but you. But that is more the exception than the rule, most of the time I can live with the bugs. It's the "maybe you ought to want to fix these if you want me to buy the next version" bugs, not "I need this fixed now and I don't care YOU think it's a low priority bug".
1. OSS evangelist throws sales pitch at newbie 2. Newbie starts using OSS, tries to file a bug 3. "Scratch my own itch" developer tells him to get lost
You can't on the one side say "Hey, [OSS software] is just as good as [closed payware] and it's free if one will get you "Thanks we're always interested in the bugs our (paying) customer are experiencing" and the other "You got what you paid for, go fix it yourself". And if they say "Well I don't know how to code, could I pay someone to fix it?" then they'll be quoted custom development prices that'll scare anyone right back to COTS software because they're used to that cost being spread over thousands of users. Remember most people are used to getting the whole MS Office suite for $100-150, that's 15-20 hours at minimum wage.
This isn't just some temporary situation, there's a great many people in the FLOSS community that literally don't want users, they just want more developers and anyone who isn't going to contribute anything isn't worth giving the time of day. Then there's the people who says it's so easy your Grandma could use it, but in practice it only works as a tech geek keeps fixing whatever broke in the last upgrade of Ubuntu. Because you don't get help, and if you do get help it's like 10% of the way pointing you in the right direction. You're seeing a regression? Can you bisect it down to what commit caused it? To a person who just use the binary packages on the system you might as well speak alien. Not to mention it's literally hours of work for someone who maybe wanted to take 5 minutes of their time to tell someone there's a bug. That's one of the things I learned, in 95% of the cases it's meaningless to just file a bug because very few developers bother to go around fixing bugs they don't experience themselves, and if they do they're likely to fix it on their own. Oh yes, and unlike any closed source software I've worked with OSS software makes you the steward of the bug. If there's a reproducible test case, it's still easier to file off a "is this still a problem?" than testing it yourself.
Do I blame them? Not really, I do enough work at work to know I don't want to do free work at home as well. But some are setting users off on the completely wrong foot, giving them completely wrong expectations. It really should come with a warning label "For technical users only. You don't have to be a coder, but it helps. You did not pay for this software, so any person you ask for help is likely a volunteer. Your problems are not their problems, so it's not certain anyone wants to help. Don't expect any bugs to fix themselves just because you report it. The more help you can provide developers, the more likely it might get fixed. Getting angry because nobody can or will help will get you nowhere. In short, you're on your own."
Slashdot Mirror
Guess who will have to pay the damages if the supreme court appeal fails?
For him there is no appeal now, the verdict is final. Which I think with 99% probability means we'll never hear from him again because he's either dead or disappeared, I won't speculate in which but I'd be extremely surprised if he should ever reappear.
Am I the only one disturbed that the word "freedom" apparently has negative connotations?
It sounds a bit much like liberate when most companies don't see themselves as captives. It's more over the top than anything else. OpenOffice is a rather ideal name in my opinion, that it's open (source) and that it's an office (suite). Well minus the ".org" that they had to add for some trademark reason, meh.
Even if we assume they're both tainted with devious Chinese spyware (and I'm not sure that China would want to harm such a huge and valuable debtor, by the way) which of these sounds like a bigger threat:
I don't think you should ever try to predict what can happen with alliances and defense pacts, surprise attacks and whatnot. It's not like the US pre-WWII would predict they'd be at war with Italy and Japan, possibly Germany but even that is doubtful. If say India and Pakistan or the Middle East start a war it can easily escalate into WWIII with US and China on opposing sides. I don't for one second buy that we're "beyond" war. Besides, there's a small causality loop there, when people are sure the opposition won't declare war that is when they're likely to act in such an arrogant and aggressive manner that it does lead to war.
1. A large Chinese-built wireless network which the government can monitor or shut down with relative ease.
Except that if you're in a state of war shutting down so you can't mobilize is a rather bad thing. But that's much less of a worry than the possibility of backdoors to tap into communications or inject mis-communication. It's easy to say we'll have alternatives but if they're not used they'll go away. For example less and less people have landlines, cables buried into the ground you can run from bunkers. In a war cell phone towers are like homing beacons for missiles, they're likely to be the first to go and all the people that rely on cell phones for communication will be out of reach. Sure, there's VoIP but is the Internet operational? Does everybody have headsets? Can you find all the numbers you need to call there? Even if the phones are compromised, people will quickly start using those that work. If the whole system is down, then you're screwed big time.
While I mostly agree, I am happy for the opportunity to hit the emergency brake and find a McDonalds when the local cuisine is creating havoc on my system. If I'm not feeling well then none of the other cultural or other experiences make fun. But if McDonalds is their choice on day one, get better friends...
And if you didn't want him gossiping with your neighbours about your shopping habits, you could always go to the next town. Now the shopkeeper in the next town (who's never even met you) knows all about your preferences for honey, blue stockings, ribbed condoms, and 12-year-old Scotch before you get there.
Actually, he won't have a clue. As far as I understand it, this system just tracks a cell phone's frequency slot. The moment you enter another cell tower's area your frequency will change with no way of tracking it and if you come back you'll have a different frequency slot. It only works for mapping out the path that cell phone took through your mall, very little else. But that wouldn't be sensationalist enough.
All you're saying is in theory true, except AMD has a ton of internal code that does this. If they were forced to deal with the GPL by external code they'd probably not use it at all, just a stripped down version of catalyst or the AMD-written parts of the Linux driver or a combination thereof.
It's not as simply as just seeing the benefit, actually getting it through the legal clearing process takes a lot of time and resources. And they don't even always say yes, there's a lot of headaches and holdups there. I doubt they'd impose the same conditions on their WEC7 driver if they could avoid it - and they can.
And the reality distortion field is still fully operational.
That's not so strange, since I assume all the essential strategy decisions going into the iPhone 4GS was done while Jobs was still in charge. It's the next iPhone that has to fight against the ghost of Jobs, where everyone will question if Apple will be the same without him. It's possible that Cook will be held some impossible standard where anything and everything would have been better if Jobs was still there.
Until it mutates into something that's not so restricted, and if it then has huge food sources it can devour alone it'll spread like wildfire. On a much less sci-fi note, a true global pandemic is still one of those really scary scenarios despite all the hype. If it first spirals out of control and you have people fleeing everywhere breaking quarantine it could get really, really nasty.
The problem is, Science is incomplete: is is _unable_ to answer these types of questions so it it hand-waves them as being "unimportant."
Not unimportant, just that it is impossible to narrow down the possible explanations. Each religion tends to give one answer, but none can be shown to be right and the others wrong. If anyone is handwaving, then it's the religions trying to prove what can't be proven.
That said, most of the world religions do make claims in their religious tests that can be scientifically tested and proven wrong. Unfortunately there's a whole lot of unscientific explanations for this, including "This text is an allegory", "It's a test of faith", "It was written by his disciples" and "It's simplified to their level". No matter if specific claims like the earth being the center of the universe are conceded, the religion lives on.
Yeah, though sometimes I think Apple has it easier because they don't promote technical excellency as their strength. Like for example the iPhone antenna problems, the market mostly shrugged and kept using iPhones because they're intuitive and people figure out how to use them. If on the other hand you bought your phone because it supports triband dual UTMS 4G or whatever, then the antenna not working properly is like disaster. Yes, the 4GS has faster CPU, faster graphics, improved camera and doubled some transfer speed but the buzz, what I hear everybody is talking about is Siri. As long as that is working, I think they'd be willing to forgive any lesser technical oversights.
The one he's weighed in on is that the position will not be configurable, it'll be on your left and you'll like it. The only possible exception are RTL countries, but there everything will switch from left to right. What I don't like is the clear WONTFIX and the reasoning:
A willingness to limit the set of supported options is a large part of the quality of the out-of-box desktop experience. For example, the old Gnome Panel was designed with the goal of making many, many things possible. you could put them on any edge of the screen, you could write any sort of app, that supported any sort of interface pattern. And the result was very, very hard to use well. All of that customization made it impossible to provide an "overall feeling" to the old Gnome Panel.
Out of the box means out of the box. If you start making all sorts of changes, that's no longer the out of the box experience but the customized experience. That you take away configurability and customization options doesn't mean the out of the box experience gets any better, it just means you no longer has a choice. Sounds like he's been taking lessons from the Gnome developers. At least he's clear on that he will consider external patches to implement it, he just won't put Canonical staff on it.
Well there's two meanings:
Q: Why does the apple fall to the ground?
A: Gravity
Q: Yes, you've named the force and given me a formula to calculate it but why does the apple fall to the ground?
A: We don't know, and even if we ever find something more fundamental that explains gravity, then that again won't have a "why".
Science explains the "how", when you derive it from other things we often say "why". But if you want turtles all the way down, there's no "why", no reason the universe is this way and not some other way. It's purely descriptive of the way it is.
If Einstein had not developed Relativity, someone else would have, so I guess we can just sort of ignore or make light his contributions to physics on /. to make ourselves look kewl.
The assertion was more like if it wasn't for Einstein, we'd still not know about relativity. It's an often asked question in history, how essential was that singular person or would the conditions produce the same results regardless. We have many cases of parallel inventions where say Daimler and Benz both invented the automobile, or where many in addition to Bell was about to invent the telephone. In other cases one person opened up a field nobody else realize existed and could have gone unnoticed for decades or potentially longer. With all respect to Dennis Ritchie, there was a lot of parallel development of programming languages. It's not like we'd all be stuck in the 70s if he hadn't invented C.
Maybe because all seems at this point to be based on one Google+ post and slashdot is a bit wary of such announcements, with the Stephen King trolls and all...
Newell reiterated his concerns about a closed model being the 'wrong philosophical approach' --- I guess that means he doesnt like the idea of this happening any more than i do then ...
Also called "a market Steam doesn't have access to". So far consoles have been mostly for AAA games, while Apple has been letting almost everyone and their dog sell through the app store. If Apple makes a console that attracts a lot of smaller, independent developers who need a distribution method and steal them from the PC market then Steam will lose a lot of business. So I'm not sure his interests are so philosophical.
They may have the software library but all those windows games depend on windows. Valve would have to do something profoundly do to more than be a kiosk application on top of that and Microsoft would likely be highly uncooperative since it'd be a direct competitor with their xbox. Apple on the other hand has the whole stack and experience with hardware production and distribution. Basically it'd be repurposing something like the Mac Mini into an entertainment center, maybe with beefier graphics.
This. If I buy a piece of stolen art, hang it on my wall for 50 years then try to sell it, can the original owners demand to get it back? Hell yes. The only exception to this would be if somehow under some legal theory that they didn't call the cops on him to recover it sooner means they've abandoned it. But that doesn't seem very likely.
VMWare Workstation would still run fine with 1 or 2 guests without VT-d, wouldn't it?
Depends on what you're doing, VT-d is virtualized IO. Both have VT-x so CPU-intensive clients should run just fine with or without it, but disk access will be slower without it. But in my experience running virtualization without it, it's not that slow anyway.
The prices of the Intel ten core stuff is insane on the level of if you have to ask you can't afford it as an example in server space. Meanwhile there are slightly slower AMD 12 core CPUs for under $1000.
Intel's most expensive chip is $4616, AMDs is $2649. True you get AMD chips to under $1000, but then it's no longer very fair to compare them to Intel's most expensive ones either. The 10-cores are more like the Extreme Edition chips, which despite having two cores less perform much higher than the fastest Opteron...
The i7 2600K has all of the bells and whistles enabled. Except maybe ECC memory...
No, it doesn't have VT-d or TXT enabled, the 2600 - not the K - does though. It less for a fraction less, has slightly worse integrated graphics and is multiplier locked, it's basically the business version of the 2600K. And like you say, if you want ECC you must get Xeons.
AMD had a real good run in the early 2000's AMD actually was selling more PC's with its chips then Intel. Then Intel Core 2 Duo processors came out and AMD had to go back to catch up mode again.
I'm pretty sure they didn't and it was just a majority of the retail sales outside the big OEMs. I don't ever think AMD ever had the fab capacity to supply over 50% of the total market.
Sorry, but even though the reviews try not to kill the underdog this chip is huge, hot, performs crap in anything but extremely well threaded applications and even there it barely competes with Intel's 2500K/2600K. Anandtech passed 300W trying to overclock this beast. It's like AMD implemented every bad idea Intel had with the PIV.
They'll do strategic things for a while, but if the margin per wafer doesn't show up pretty soon, they kill the experiment. (Speaking of strategic, here's a fun game: The next time a salesman (or marketroid) tries to convince you to do some deal because "it's strategic", respond with "Oh, you mean it's no revenue." Enjoy deer-in-headlights face.)
Isn't that pretty much the definition of strategic? We're not great at making these kinds of products today, we lack the customer base, the experience and reputation. So we do projects at break-even or even possibly a slight loss in order to break into the market, because it's our strategy that we want to become an established player. If a) we aren't able to establish us or b) we do and there's still no profits then we don't keep doing what doesn't work.
I can't imagine which one you are talking about, but it's not one that I've ever seen.
Okay, don't get me wrong... it's far from certain anything will get fixed, but most of the time you get good lip service. The people in the support forums don't bitch at you for wanting support because that's what they're being paid to give. And even though your bug report might be filed into the nearest black hole, they tend to acknowledge that bugs are their problem, they can't boomerang it around on you and tell you to go fix it yourself. Only they have the source code, only they can fix it. It might end up as a low-priority bug that's left to rot but ultimately at some level they want customers satisfied enough - or locked in enough, yet not sucking so badly you switch anyway - that they buy the next upgrade. And what you tell other potential customers, because they want sales.
Voting with your wallet isn't a perfect system, but most companies work to satisfy those who pay their bills. Of course if you're just one of many, many paying customers your voice is tiny. In open source you have the power to trump all that make a patch, regardless if it's important for anyone but you. But that is more the exception than the rule, most of the time I can live with the bugs. It's the "maybe you ought to want to fix these if you want me to buy the next version" bugs, not "I need this fixed now and I don't care YOU think it's a low priority bug".
It's the usual scenario, you pick the idiot:
1. OSS evangelist throws sales pitch at newbie
2. Newbie starts using OSS, tries to file a bug
3. "Scratch my own itch" developer tells him to get lost
You can't on the one side say "Hey, [OSS software] is just as good as [closed payware] and it's free if one will get you "Thanks we're always interested in the bugs our (paying) customer are experiencing" and the other "You got what you paid for, go fix it yourself". And if they say "Well I don't know how to code, could I pay someone to fix it?" then they'll be quoted custom development prices that'll scare anyone right back to COTS software because they're used to that cost being spread over thousands of users. Remember most people are used to getting the whole MS Office suite for $100-150, that's 15-20 hours at minimum wage.
This isn't just some temporary situation, there's a great many people in the FLOSS community that literally don't want users, they just want more developers and anyone who isn't going to contribute anything isn't worth giving the time of day. Then there's the people who says it's so easy your Grandma could use it, but in practice it only works as a tech geek keeps fixing whatever broke in the last upgrade of Ubuntu. Because you don't get help, and if you do get help it's like 10% of the way pointing you in the right direction. You're seeing a regression? Can you bisect it down to what commit caused it? To a person who just use the binary packages on the system you might as well speak alien. Not to mention it's literally hours of work for someone who maybe wanted to take 5 minutes of their time to tell someone there's a bug. That's one of the things I learned, in 95% of the cases it's meaningless to just file a bug because very few developers bother to go around fixing bugs they don't experience themselves, and if they do they're likely to fix it on their own. Oh yes, and unlike any closed source software I've worked with OSS software makes you the steward of the bug. If there's a reproducible test case, it's still easier to file off a "is this still a problem?" than testing it yourself.
Do I blame them? Not really, I do enough work at work to know I don't want to do free work at home as well. But some are setting users off on the completely wrong foot, giving them completely wrong expectations. It really should come with a warning label "For technical users only. You don't have to be a coder, but it helps. You did not pay for this software, so any person you ask for help is likely a volunteer. Your problems are not their problems, so it's not certain anyone wants to help. Don't expect any bugs to fix themselves just because you report it. The more help you can provide developers, the more likely it might get fixed. Getting angry because nobody can or will help will get you nowhere. In short, you're on your own."
It isn't exactly an OSS sales pitch though.