Would you *really* buy MS Office if it was ported?
I believe it was mentioned in a certain interview that this is exactly the question (and a reason) why they (MS) will not port Office: all us zealots ain't gonna buy it.
Let me put it this way: I think that saying "we decided that we spend time putting together this the-best-of-breed Linux distro and now we will charge you" is (a) overstatement in a sense noted elswhere in the thred (who knows anything about Libra other than they are YALD (yet another linux distro)?); (b) untrue in a sense that they are not spending nearly as much time on making it _potentially_ "the best" distro as Debian-proper does (or, for that matter, Progeny, Ximian, even Corel). This is why I am saying that it is "wrong".
Charging for the GNU software is fine -- I do not see any problem with that at all, that was not my point.
That's right, but another point to make is that LibraNet is *based* on Debian that is available for free, their developers spending hours debugging a host of applications/utilities/tools that Libra will now charge $15 for only hosting ontheir site, packaging under a different lable and adding a few spiffy apps? *This* is *wrong*.
I always had very mixed feelings about GNOME and KDE. Sure, GNOME looks way
artsier than KDE (and the difference was even more drastic in KDE 1.x days).
On the other hand, there are many nice tools in KDE that don't have
equivalents in stability and functionality in GNOME. But same goes for GNOME:
RedCarpet is not available for KDE.
QT maybe a more mature and better developed tookit (and the coming of GTK 2.0
has been delayed so many times). KDE maybe running just a little bit faster
(and this is subjective, but has been witnessed on different machines, with
different kernel and X versions). GNOME may have a bit higher coolness factor
(and some very energetic supporters/advocates). What's in it for me, asa
user?
I think that what would make sense, and Andreas does mention it in the
interview, just as well as it has been mentioned a few time in this thread, is
better interoperability between GNOME and KDE apps. The ultimate in it would
be a very flexible look'n'feel change to adopt to the current environment.
KDE does allow you already now to force at least colors and fonts onto non-KDE
apps (GNOME including), but all other UI elements (buttons, scroll bars, etc.)
remain toolkit-dependant. Wouldn't be great if those also could adopt?
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is very much doable even now: KDE and GTK
themes could be made very compatible, and theme engines could be changed so
that theming could be transparent.
Another thing is interoperability per se: DND, embedding, file associations.
There is no point in discussing whether these 2 project should be merged: they
won't. But better usability could benefit both.
Actually, this is one of the best balanced RMS statements I've seen: he takes a lot of care not to sound "a lot like a cocky communist", as someone noted elsewhere in this thread, but rather a "freedom-fighter". A very nice read, puts many people/accents into/in right places.
I am sorry if my remarks have "belittled" you. Debian is also not the only Linux/*NIX disro I have ever used/installed. While I can agree that installation experience cannot be called the most pleasant of all, I don't believe that you are being fair to it either.
Being a "professional programmer" does not add (nor eliminates) you any credibility -- I am *not* a programmer at all, but had never a single problem installing *any* operating system that I was interested in exploring (with an exception of OS/2 Warp).
I am very sorry that you had such problems with Debian. At the same time I am having a problem understanding how (with all the experience that you are citing) it could possibly happen to a degree of pissing you of so much?..
If you wan to continue this discussion off-thread, feel free to reach me via my [unprofessional, never finished] website.
Re:I like the Debian philosophy...but....
on
Stormix Bankruptcy
·
· Score: 1
A few comments and remarks on your fiasco (in no particular order):
RTFM. Really, it helps. You'd safe yourself a *lot* of trouble. Even though this does not help advocating Debian as the best.
Never-ever move onto unstable until you get basic system up and running smoothly. By basic I do not mean debian-base. But I would not include X into base either. Get the system to the point of booting and working -- then move onto updating it to testing/unstable.
Once your basic system is working, you can try and move to unstable. I would, however, urge you to first try testing -- it should mostly be stable, without packages breaking on each other. On the other hand, over the past 3 years that I run Debian, I had only 2 or 3 time faced sever package breakages... Well, when this happens I prefer to try and roll-back -- instll previous version.
How can patches for Xserver be RH-specific? If they are RPM'ed (for whatever reason) -- use alien to convert to.deb and install them...
With all due respect -- it is apt-get dist-upgrade
Incompatibility with Debian Sicial Contract/Constitution? Anyway, one can always fetch it directly from Webmin's site -- stock package (.tar.gz) knows about Debian and can handle it without problem...
\begin{holly_war} Sawfish (formerly sawmill) is fine. It sure is lighter than E, and hence may *sometimes* seem faster.
However (and this only applies to the case that you are using sawfish bare -- w/o GNOME as a desktop manager), take a closer look at how fast a desktop menu appears -- not any faster than in case of E.
Sawfish is a great component used _within_ GNOME's framework. It is very customizable as well, but not anywhere close to E's level. Also, on a personal note, I just don't want to learn LISP (or guile or scheme or rep) just to customize my WM.
\end(holly_war}
Important disclosure: I do not use E now *exactly* because I found it not fast enough for use on a laptop. I am constantly switching between fvwm2/GNOME/KDE2 whenever I get bored/frustrated with either.
Yes, I have tried BlackBox but was not paticulary impressed...
It may be an OL killer, but *why* all the recent OL killers look almost *exactly* their target looks?! OSS produces better quality, more solid apps, but seems to be enherintly incapable of producing innovative UI.
This may well be explainable: it is not cheap to conduct various usability studies, yet it is still sad nonetheless.
>2. Surely environmentalists will require us to
>simultaneously send a ship in the opposite
>direction so that we don't disrupt the sun.
Shouldn't then they be worried about all other planets in the solar system which we so extensively use for interplanetary maneuvers? Like Venus, Mars, our Moon, Jupiter, Saturn, etc.? We're pretty much slowing them down with... But maybe this will have to be the next step in environment protection, and we better start now!
> And to shed some more light on the insanity
> of their decision, they DO support FM on other
> unices (HP-UX for example)
>
> Do you still find that much sense in their
> decision?
Yeah, agree: I cannot believe that it has taken such a great deal of effort to recompile Solaris, HP/UX or AIX (and there used to be Digital/Tru64 version as well) version of it to run under Linux! It is only commercial viability of it as a product that mattered. If I remember correctly, there was a question: "How much would you pay for the full-featured commercial version of this product?" Now, how many of us said "Yeah! I'll pay you $799, just as much as you guys charge for Win/Mac/UNIX version!"
Pouring money does nort make sense, agree. Creating a freware version of a commercial product may not be the wisest decision either, especially considering the proce differential and the audience.
It is still a pitty: FrameMaker was THE best of the breed out there: a lot more stable, a lot more function-rich and than any other Linux alternative: be it StarOffice, KOffice, Applix or AbiWord. I really enjoyed using it and really, really regret it going.
Guess I'm gonna have to go back to LyX for most of my document processing needs, or just plain and simple (simple?) learn TeX/LaTeX or SGML...
Some job you have:) Some may say that a canary in a golden cage is still a canary in a cage... Some may say that it truly is happier than in an ordinary tin one. Some may not care at all. Some would let a bird free instead.
> The truth, of course, is that along with higher
> pay also comes more job security and less
> stress.
I could agree on job security (thouhg not always), but less stress -- you're kidding yourself. Along with higher paid job come higher expectations, more deliverables to meet, more people to manage. It becomes harder to balance to parts of the equation: work and personal life.
I still can't believe X doesn't support font anti-aliasing...
I have a feeling there used to be a VERY long thread a few months back on WHY it does not support it and whether it is simple to built it in. Good thing that at least it supports TT fonts by default...
Or they could use efm for desktop management. Windows decoration is *definitely* E with BlueSteel (vertical titles, somewhat thin frame, dark diaginal bars on a title bar, steelish color...)
Ugh... had 1917 not happened, there wouldn't be a 1984. Also, do read your history book right: it was not Russians who killed people, but rather a certain Party leaders.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not saying that _selling_ GNU software is wrong. I am saying that claiming your work over that of thousands of Debian contributors is wrong.
Then again -- are there any stats on Libra install base?
Let me put it this way: I think that saying "we decided that we spend time putting together this the-best-of-breed Linux distro and now we will charge you" is (a) overstatement in a sense noted elswhere in the thred (who knows anything about Libra other than they are YALD (yet another linux distro)?); (b) untrue in a sense that they are not spending nearly as much time on making it _potentially_ "the best" distro as Debian-proper does (or, for that matter, Progeny, Ximian, even Corel). This is why I am saying that it is "wrong".
Charging for the GNU software is fine -- I do not see any problem with that at all, that was not my point.
That's right, but another point to make is that LibraNet is *based* on Debian that is available for free, their developers spending hours debugging a host of applications/utilities/tools that Libra will now charge $15 for only hosting ontheir site, packaging under a different lable and adding a few spiffy apps? *This* is *wrong*.
Don't forget that it's Sybase at heart...
Yeah, right, or spending 100's times more on a dubious 'space-defence' (a.k.a. 'star wars') program!
> spacecraft will be operated from the Babakin
> Space Center near Moscow.
This is the first time I have heard of "Babakin Space Center"...
I always had very mixed feelings about GNOME and KDE. Sure, GNOME looks way
artsier than KDE (and the difference was even more drastic in KDE 1.x days).
On the other hand, there are many nice tools in KDE that don't have
equivalents in stability and functionality in GNOME. But same goes for GNOME:
RedCarpet is not available for KDE.
QT maybe a more mature and better developed tookit (and the coming of GTK 2.0
has been delayed so many times). KDE maybe running just a little bit faster
(and this is subjective, but has been witnessed on different machines, with
different kernel and X versions). GNOME may have a bit higher coolness factor
(and some very energetic supporters/advocates). What's in it for me, asa
user?
I think that what would make sense, and Andreas does mention it in the
interview, just as well as it has been mentioned a few time in this thread, is
better interoperability between GNOME and KDE apps. The ultimate in it would
be a very flexible look'n'feel change to adopt to the current environment.
KDE does allow you already now to force at least colors and fonts onto non-KDE
apps (GNOME including), but all other UI elements (buttons, scroll bars, etc.)
remain toolkit-dependant. Wouldn't be great if those also could adopt?
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is very much doable even now: KDE and GTK
themes could be made very compatible, and theme engines could be changed so
that theming could be transparent.
Another thing is interoperability per se: DND, embedding, file associations.
There is no point in discussing whether these 2 project should be merged: they
won't. But better usability could benefit both.
Actually, this is one of the best balanced RMS statements I've seen: he takes a lot of care not to sound "a lot like a cocky communist", as someone noted elsewhere in this thread, but rather a "freedom-fighter". A very nice read, puts many people/accents into/in right places.
I am sorry if my remarks have "belittled" you. Debian is also not the only Linux/*NIX disro I have ever used/installed. While I can agree that installation experience cannot be called the most pleasant of all, I don't believe that you are being fair to it either.
Being a "professional programmer" does not add (nor eliminates) you any credibility -- I am *not* a programmer at all, but had never a single problem installing *any* operating system that I was interested in exploring (with an exception of OS/2 Warp).
I am very sorry that you had such problems with Debian. At the same time I am having a problem understanding how (with all the experience that you are citing) it could possibly happen to a degree of pissing you of so much?..
If you wan to continue this discussion off-thread, feel free to reach me via my [unprofessional, never finished] website.
Incompatibility with Debian Sicial Contract/Constitution? Anyway, one can always fetch it directly from Webmin's site -- stock package (.tar.gz) knows about Debian and can handle it without problem...
Can you say Progeny?
\begin{holly_war}
Sawfish (formerly sawmill) is fine. It sure is lighter than E, and hence may *sometimes* seem faster.
However (and this only applies to the case that you are using sawfish bare -- w/o GNOME as a desktop manager), take a closer look at how fast a desktop menu appears -- not any faster than in case of E.
Sawfish is a great component used _within_ GNOME's framework. It is very customizable as well, but not anywhere close to E's level. Also, on a personal note, I just don't want to learn LISP (or guile or scheme or rep) just to customize my WM.
\end(holly_war}
Important disclosure: I do not use E now *exactly* because I found it not fast enough for use on a laptop. I am constantly switching between fvwm2/GNOME/KDE2 whenever I get bored/frustrated with either.
Yes, I have tried BlackBox but was not paticulary impressed...
Like some say: alpha/beta is the state of mind. :)
It may be an OL killer, but *why* all the recent OL killers look almost *exactly* their target looks?! OSS produces better quality, more solid apps, but seems to be enherintly incapable of producing innovative UI.
This may well be explainable: it is not cheap to conduct various usability studies, yet it is still sad nonetheless.
>2. Surely environmentalists will require us to
>simultaneously send a ship in the opposite
>direction so that we don't disrupt the sun.
Shouldn't then they be worried about all other planets in the solar system which we so extensively use for interplanetary maneuvers? Like Venus, Mars, our Moon, Jupiter, Saturn, etc.? We're pretty much slowing them down with... But maybe this will have to be the next step in environment protection, and we better start now!
LaTeX shifts my mother-fucking figures in an immensely stupid order
This is called "arranging," and is done in the most efficient (from a document layout point of view) way.
> And to shed some more light on the insanity
> of their decision, they DO support FM on other
> unices (HP-UX for example)
>
> Do you still find that much sense in their
> decision?
Yeah, agree: I cannot believe that it has taken such a great deal of effort to recompile Solaris, HP/UX or AIX (and there used to be Digital/Tru64 version as well) version of it to run under Linux! It is only commercial viability of it as a product that mattered. If I remember correctly, there was a question: "How much would you pay for the full-featured commercial version of this product?" Now, how many of us said "Yeah! I'll pay you $799, just as much as you guys charge for Win/Mac/UNIX version!"
Pouring money does nort make sense, agree. Creating a freware version of a commercial product may not be the wisest decision either, especially considering the proce differential and the audience.
It is still a pitty: FrameMaker was THE best of the breed out there: a lot more stable, a lot more function-rich and than any other Linux alternative: be it StarOffice, KOffice, Applix or AbiWord. I really enjoyed using it and really, really regret it going.
Guess I'm gonna have to go back to LyX for most of my document processing needs, or just plain and simple (simple?) learn TeX/LaTeX or SGML...
Some job you have :) Some may say that a canary in a golden cage is still a canary in a cage... Some may say that it truly is happier than in an ordinary tin one. Some may not care at all. Some would let a bird free instead.
> The truth, of course, is that along with higher
> pay also comes more job security and less
> stress.
I could agree on job security (thouhg not always), but less stress -- you're kidding yourself. Along with higher paid job come higher expectations, more deliverables to meet, more people to manage. It becomes harder to balance to parts of the equation: work and personal life.
I have a feeling there used to be a VERY long thread a few months back on WHY it does not support it and whether it is simple to built it in. Good thing that at least it supports TT fonts by default...
Or they could use efm for desktop management. Windows decoration is *definitely* E with BlueSteel (vertical titles, somewhat thin frame, dark diaginal bars on a title bar, steelish color...)
Ugh... had 1917 not happened, there wouldn't be a 1984. Also, do read your history book right: it was not Russians who killed people, but rather a certain Party leaders.