Nonsense, I provided an example in the previous post about dental cleaning vs. emergency dental procedures. Those numbers are easily verifiable, don't be lazy. Look it up.
I personally use that example because it happened to me. I had no access to dental care for the better part of a decade. I am now on public assistance, and receiving the dental treatment I need. It is costing my state's taxpayers north of $15000. I need about 14 fillings, 8 crowns, and a root canal (done, thank god). All of that - ALL OF THAT - is completely unnecessary and could have been avoided if I had had proper preventative care during my teenage years and early twenties, at the cost of about $75 a year. For those keeping score at home, that is (75*10) $750 vs. $15000. This is simple math. It's not hard, it's not complicated, everybody knows it.
So let me get this straight... you're complaining that it costs a lot for taxpayers to foot the bill for the small subset of patients who can't afford to pay... while simultaneously arguing that taxpayers should foot the bill for everyone?
Of course. For instance, the average cost of a dental checkup and cleaning is $1000. You can pretend to not get this concept all you want, but it's not that complex.
Not being from any of those places, I can't really speak to the examples you raise here, so I won't try. But I want to raise a counter-example.
Here in MN, we have MinnesotaCare, which is sort of a more comprehensive, more inclusive version of Medicaid. Income based, sliding scale kind of thing. Very broad, pretty much anyone who doesn't have employer-offered health insurance can enroll.
But here's the kicker. It's not an insurance plan of its own. When you enroll in MNCare, they give you your choice of a few different insurers (Blue Cross and HealthPartners are the two I can name offhand, I think there are a couple others). It's publicly subsidized (and just as importantly, publicly accountable) private insurance.
Anyway, I'm on it right now (self-employed, times are hard). So I'm insured through HealthPartners' MNCare plan. It is by far the best insurance I've ever had, and it's so cheap it may as well be free ($10/month, 0 deductible, copays are three bucks for anything but an ER visit, which is $25, note that there are different levels of coverage with MNCare, this is a middle of the road one). And I can use it pretty much anywhere (this being Minesota, HealthPartners is fucking everywhere). Dental, vision, mental health, chiropractic, everything's covered. It is worlds better than any employer-provided plan I've ever been on.
To my understanding, the Obama proposal for a public option is broadly similar to what I've described here. I'm not saying that's a perfect plan on a nationwide level, although it does work very well here. My point is that it's not really a debate about "socialized medicine vs. free market." The right tries to paint it as such, but it's simply not true. We can decide what the future looks like in America, and it's no secret that we need to figure out because the way it works now is totally broken. A few old white dudes are getting filthy rich off keeping people sick. And that is fucked up. This is America, for God's sake. In the richest country in the world, you shouldn't have to pick between a tooth cleaning and groceries.
If you get sick because you can't afford a doctor visit, and you get other people sick, then it costs everyone more money.
Or, if you can't afford to go to the doctor and get sick enough to require hospitalization, well then you sure as shit can't afford that, which means the taxpayer ends up paying, and once again, it costs everyone more money.
This is basic third grade math. Don't pretend you don't get it.
Companies that are successful in this field have UI experts -- and the management to back them up -- to say
"Yes, this works adequately, but it looks awful. Sorry, you can't ship it." "Yes, this works adequately, but it doesn't blend well with the rest of our product line. Sorry, you can't ship it." "Yes, this works adequately, but it's hard to use. Sorry, you can't ship it." "Yes, this works adequately, but there's too many extraneous features. Sorry, you can't ship it."
Close. To open source developers you are either (a) The developer himself, or (b) Not the developer himself. If (b) then the excuse is either (i) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself, or (ii) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.
[citation needed]
Seriously. I'd like to argue with you here, but you're not even giving me anything to argue with. How about an example or something?
This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands. To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.
I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design. But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?
For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.
While I very much identify with your self-description there, and agree with the sentiment and frustration you express, I think you're wrong to throw it out as a blanket criticism of free software as a whole. Mozilla, sure. I've always thought of the Mozilla projects as a good example of "free but not open," that is, the code is free, but the process is non-inclusive. If you've got a reproducible bug, they might be interested, but a usability complaint? Forget it. You can paint it as "they're not interested" or "they're too busy" or whatever, but you're just banging your head against the wall. (And as another replier to your comment mentioned, that's not a "free software thing," it's just a "big organization thing." you'd get just as much satisfaction trying to send in a usability comment about MS Outlook.)
On the other hand, I've had much better experiences sending in wishlist items or usability comments to smaller projects (assuming the developer isn't just a douchebag).
They're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF, IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM, and, especially, The GIMP.
Actually, users don't give a fuck. That's why you've got a trendy hardware company (hint: it's the one mentioned in TFA, if you read that) named after a fruit and the biggest name in graphic design software named after a mud hut, with their flagship product named after a circus performer. Because nobody gives a fuck.
Except of course for people like you that just want to troll away in the middle of a usability discussion that's got absolutely nothing to do with your comment. For crying out loud, I can't even find anything in the comment that you're allegedly replying to that relates to your little naming rant in any way. So what exactly is it that you're on about here?
In several years of posting on Slashdot, this is the first time I've bitched about a moderation, but get fucking real. "If you take the Linux kernel and make an OS on top of it, it's not a Linux distribution!" Tell me with a straight face that that's not the dumbest goddamn thing you've heard this week, then mod me whatever you want.
Well, it depends on what you define crap - are service packs crap? What about device drivers, office suites, compression programs, media codecs, cd-burning software, development platforms?
If your office suite or your cd burning software are making your system "measurably start up slower," you need to shop around for new software. For real.
Shouldnâ(TM)t i use my iPod because it requires iTunes and QuickTime?
Your iPod in no way "requires iTunes and QuickTime."
Fine, let's see where that goes. Let's make up some numbers (hey, you started it). Let's say that Windows has 90% marketshare, Mac 9% and Linux in its various flavors a cumulative 1%.
Okay, now let's say there are 1000 Windows viruses (we're making this up, remember, the actual number is certainly many times that, but 1000 divides well). Okay, 9% of 1000 is 90, and 1% is 10. Can you provide a link to 90 Mac viruses, or 10 for Linux? Hell no you can't.
"But Ris," you bleat, "that's unfair! The number of exploits would certainly be in geometric proportion to marketshare!"
Yeah, I've heard that one before too. So to even the playing field, can you even name one virus that targets Linux? Just one? I mean, even if it holds 1% marketshare, 1% of the world's computers is several million people, there must at least be one virus out there that somebody's written to at least prove it could be done and shut all us self-righteous Unix pricks up, right? One?
I'm not the GP, but I parsed their comment as saying that the landscape has changed such that even if Microsoft does continue to hold a monopoly position in the desktop OS market, they are no longer culturally relevant.
Given that Win 7 is essentially just a Vista service pack by another name, I will not be paying several hundred bucks to upgrade. I'll stick with XP until it is unsupported, and then I'll switch away from Microsoft altogether.
Sure you will, buddy. And if cigarettes go up any more I'm quitting them.
I do maintain what I said: Not everyone likes UI design, and in general F/OSS projects are sorely lacking in that regard. KDE 4 is a rare--but hopefully changing--exception to this rule.
As you noted, there are some really shining exceptions; several of the FOSS media player offerings also come to mind. But overall (and with a heavy heart), I've got to agree. For instance...
I still can't stand Gnome. I don't see that changing in the future...
Oh brother, talk about a case in point. A perfect example of a project that just doesn't seem to give a shit about design, either in the sense of "aesthetically pleasing" or "sensibly laid out." (Hold the flames, Gnome folks, I just don't care anymore.)
And to add insult to injury, it's a pain in the ass to make, apply, or customize themes (see bug #552097 among a cast of thousands), so you're mostly stuck with what your distribution gave you. I have no idea why people put up with that sort of thing. It's a terrible situation, and one that no one seems at all interested in improving.
Ironically, my first impression when I tried KDE 4.2 under FreeBSD some months back was that it looked incredibly good. It reminded me of a sort of open source Mac OS-alike. The design was clean, consistent, and impressive. There are a few expected sharp edges here and there, but I look forward to using it once it stabilizes. For now, I expect to stick (impatiently) with KDE 3.5.
Absolutely. It fits together very well, adheres as closely as possible to the rule of least surprise (yes yes, with a few exceptions), and is the most eye-poppingly gorgeous desktop I've ever seen, bar none.
I've been back and forth between KDE and Fluxbox since 4.0.0, working through or around or with the bugs as much as possible. And yeah, it's pointy in spots, and yeah, I've reported more bugs in the last six months than I previously had in my life.
But I stick with it, because at least the bugs in KDE are bugs. They are not, generally, flaws, if you catch my distinction there. You know, not to name names or anything;)
[offtopic]
I'm admittedly pretty annoyed by the colloquial use of "cowboy" in urban centers as a derogatory term.
You know, it's funny this should come up here on Slashdot. I've thought about this a whole lot lately. I think it's a pretty systemic cultural problem that distresses me greatly. As near as I can tell, it stems largely from two things:
1. All mass media in this country comes from New York or LA, with no exceptions. All television, film, and publishing. All of it. So essentially, two cities whose combined population is about 4% of the population of the country are the only ones with any sort of cultural voice. This is Not Good.
2. People who aren't from here have come to identify "cowboy" (or anything having rural or mid-America connotations) with "ignorant bigot fuckstick redneck douchebag." Partially because that's what the TV tells them, and partially because a handful of raving sociopaths (who IMNSHO should all be pulled behind the barn and aired out) seem hellbent on proving them right.
Sorry for the rant here, but like I said, it's been on my mind:)
Here's a shorter version: Not everyone likes to do design. F/OSS tends to attract people who like to work on the backend--more interesting and challenging things, that is--than to work on the user interface. They'll do the latter, usually because no one else will, but it's not necessarily something they're going to enjoy.
I don't think I agree with this, or at least I don't agree with it anymore. Just looking at the new KDE, the thought and labor that went into the interface has been incredible. It's not just coders doing this stuff for themselves anymore. Take a look at the credits. That's a hell of a lot of people.
I suspect you're probably from either the left or right coast. Only stuffy Urbanites would find "cowboy" derogatory.;)
As a midwesterner, I had to smile at this. Well said:)
Slashdot Mirror
Nonsense, I provided an example in the previous post about dental cleaning vs. emergency dental procedures. Those numbers are easily verifiable, don't be lazy. Look it up.
I personally use that example because it happened to me. I had no access to dental care for the better part of a decade. I am now on public assistance, and receiving the dental treatment I need. It is costing my state's taxpayers north of $15000. I need about 14 fillings, 8 crowns, and a root canal (done, thank god). All of that - ALL OF THAT - is completely unnecessary and could have been avoided if I had had proper preventative care during my teenage years and early twenties, at the cost of about $75 a year. For those keeping score at home, that is (75*10) $750 vs. $15000. This is simple math. It's not hard, it's not complicated, everybody knows it.
You know it too, you're just trying to be a dick.
It is. Cheaper. To keep people healthy. Than it is. To treat their. Unnecessary. Emergencies.
Christ. You make me want to drink.
So let me get this straight ... you're complaining that it costs a lot for taxpayers to foot the bill for the small subset of patients who can't afford to pay ... while simultaneously arguing that taxpayers should foot the bill for everyone?
Of course. For instance, the average cost of a dental checkup and cleaning is $1000. You can pretend to not get this concept all you want, but it's not that complex.
Pedant? Come on. You said:
but I've never seen a laptop install of Ubuntu where sleep mode worked bug free.
I gave you one. What's pedantic about that?
Not being from any of those places, I can't really speak to the examples you raise here, so I won't try. But I want to raise a counter-example.
Here in MN, we have MinnesotaCare, which is sort of a more comprehensive, more inclusive version of Medicaid. Income based, sliding scale kind of thing. Very broad, pretty much anyone who doesn't have employer-offered health insurance can enroll.
But here's the kicker. It's not an insurance plan of its own. When you enroll in MNCare, they give you your choice of a few different insurers (Blue Cross and HealthPartners are the two I can name offhand, I think there are a couple others). It's publicly subsidized (and just as importantly, publicly accountable) private insurance.
Anyway, I'm on it right now (self-employed, times are hard). So I'm insured through HealthPartners' MNCare plan. It is by far the best insurance I've ever had, and it's so cheap it may as well be free ($10/month, 0 deductible, copays are three bucks for anything but an ER visit, which is $25, note that there are different levels of coverage with MNCare, this is a middle of the road one). And I can use it pretty much anywhere (this being Minesota, HealthPartners is fucking everywhere). Dental, vision, mental health, chiropractic, everything's covered. It is worlds better than any employer-provided plan I've ever been on.
To my understanding, the Obama proposal for a public option is broadly similar to what I've described here. I'm not saying that's a perfect plan on a nationwide level, although it does work very well here. My point is that it's not really a debate about "socialized medicine vs. free market." The right tries to paint it as such, but it's simply not true. We can decide what the future looks like in America, and it's no secret that we need to figure out because the way it works now is totally broken. A few old white dudes are getting filthy rich off keeping people sick. And that is fucked up. This is America, for God's sake. In the richest country in the world, you shouldn't have to pick between a tooth cleaning and groceries.
Don't be dense.
If you get sick because you can't afford a doctor visit, and you get other people sick, then it costs everyone more money.
Or, if you can't afford to go to the doctor and get sick enough to require hospitalization, well then you sure as shit can't afford that, which means the taxpayer ends up paying, and once again, it costs everyone more money.
This is basic third grade math. Don't pretend you don't get it.
Lenovo Y510/530 series. Sleep, hibernate, webcam, wireless, surround sound, everything. No manual intervention required whatever.
I'm sorry, did you mean "Debian?"
I don't have any mod points right now, but this comment really deserves some. Thanks.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but a much more likely response will be:
(so you submit a patch)...
Well how about a big [citation needed] then? Seriously. Can you provide an example? A link? Anything?
Do you know why so much open source software sucks? It's because the programmers suck!
Granted. But do you know why so much non-free software sucks? It's because the programmers suck.
Companies that are successful in this field have UI experts -- and the management to back them up -- to say
"Yes, this works adequately, but it looks awful. Sorry, you can't ship it."
"Yes, this works adequately, but it doesn't blend well with the rest of our product line. Sorry, you can't ship it."
"Yes, this works adequately, but it's hard to use. Sorry, you can't ship it."
"Yes, this works adequately, but there's too many extraneous features. Sorry, you can't ship it."
We must not be looking at the same companies.
Close. To open source developers you are either (a) The developer himself, or (b) Not the developer himself. If (b) then the excuse is either (i) you are a Programmer - develop it yourself, or (ii) you are non-technical - I can ignore your input.
[citation needed]
Seriously. I'd like to argue with you here, but you're not even giving me anything to argue with. How about an example or something?
This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands. To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.
I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design. But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?
For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.
While I very much identify with your self-description there, and agree with the sentiment and frustration you express, I think you're wrong to throw it out as a blanket criticism of free software as a whole. Mozilla, sure. I've always thought of the Mozilla projects as a good example of "free but not open," that is, the code is free, but the process is non-inclusive. If you've got a reproducible bug, they might be interested, but a usability complaint? Forget it. You can paint it as "they're not interested" or "they're too busy" or whatever, but you're just banging your head against the wall. (And as another replier to your comment mentioned, that's not a "free software thing," it's just a "big organization thing." you'd get just as much satisfaction trying to send in a usability comment about MS Outlook.)
On the other hand, I've had much better experiences sending in wishlist items or usability comments to smaller projects (assuming the developer isn't just a douchebag).
YMMV.
They're not impressed nor amused by app names like gtkWTF, IAMRECURSIVERECURSIVEIAM, and, especially, The GIMP.
Actually, users don't give a fuck. That's why you've got a trendy hardware company (hint: it's the one mentioned in TFA, if you read that) named after a fruit and the biggest name in graphic design software named after a mud hut, with their flagship product named after a circus performer. Because nobody gives a fuck.
Except of course for people like you that just want to troll away in the middle of a usability discussion that's got absolutely nothing to do with your comment. For crying out loud, I can't even find anything in the comment that you're allegedly replying to that relates to your little naming rant in any way. So what exactly is it that you're on about here?
In several years of posting on Slashdot, this is the first time I've bitched about a moderation, but get fucking real. "If you take the Linux kernel and make an OS on top of it, it's not a Linux distribution!" Tell me with a straight face that that's not the dumbest goddamn thing you've heard this week, then mod me whatever you want.
If you just take the Linux Kernel then just build an OS on top of that you would have something dramatically different then a Linux Distribution.
Are you fucking stupid?
Well, it depends on what you define crap - are service packs crap? What about device drivers, office suites, compression programs, media codecs, cd-burning software, development platforms?
If your office suite or your cd burning software are making your system "measurably start up slower," you need to shop around for new software. For real.
Shouldnâ(TM)t i use my iPod because it requires iTunes and QuickTime?
Your iPod in no way "requires iTunes and QuickTime."
Fine, let's see where that goes. Let's make up some numbers (hey, you started it). Let's say that Windows has 90% marketshare, Mac 9% and Linux in its various flavors a cumulative 1%.
Okay, now let's say there are 1000 Windows viruses (we're making this up, remember, the actual number is certainly many times that, but 1000 divides well). Okay, 9% of 1000 is 90, and 1% is 10. Can you provide a link to 90 Mac viruses, or 10 for Linux? Hell no you can't.
"But Ris," you bleat, "that's unfair! The number of exploits would certainly be in geometric proportion to marketshare!"
Yeah, I've heard that one before too. So to even the playing field, can you even name one virus that targets Linux? Just one? I mean, even if it holds 1% marketshare, 1% of the world's computers is several million people, there must at least be one virus out there that somebody's written to at least prove it could be done and shut all us self-righteous Unix pricks up, right? One?
Bueller? Bueller?
I'm not the GP, but I parsed their comment as saying that the landscape has changed such that even if Microsoft does continue to hold a monopoly position in the desktop OS market, they are no longer culturally relevant.
Hey, don't get me wrong, I'm with you. I'm also trying to quit smoking right now, which is where my original (pissy) comment came from :)
Given that Win 7 is essentially just a Vista service pack by another name, I will not be paying several hundred bucks to upgrade. I'll stick with XP until it is unsupported, and then I'll switch away from Microsoft altogether.
Sure you will, buddy. And if cigarettes go up any more I'm quitting them.
Exactly. Random Hacker Dude might scam your Visa number. Microsoft will make billions.
I do maintain what I said: Not everyone likes UI design, and in general F/OSS projects are sorely lacking in that regard. KDE 4 is a rare--but hopefully changing--exception to this rule.
As you noted, there are some really shining exceptions; several of the FOSS media player offerings also come to mind. But overall (and with a heavy heart), I've got to agree. For instance...
I still can't stand Gnome. I don't see that changing in the future...
Oh brother, talk about a case in point. A perfect example of a project that just doesn't seem to give a shit about design, either in the sense of "aesthetically pleasing" or "sensibly laid out." (Hold the flames, Gnome folks, I just don't care anymore.)
And to add insult to injury, it's a pain in the ass to make, apply, or customize themes (see bug #552097 among a cast of thousands), so you're mostly stuck with what your distribution gave you. I have no idea why people put up with that sort of thing. It's a terrible situation, and one that no one seems at all interested in improving.
Ironically, my first impression when I tried KDE 4.2 under FreeBSD some months back was that it looked incredibly good. It reminded me of a sort of open source Mac OS-alike. The design was clean, consistent, and impressive. There are a few expected sharp edges here and there, but I look forward to using it once it stabilizes. For now, I expect to stick (impatiently) with KDE 3.5.
Absolutely. It fits together very well, adheres as closely as possible to the rule of least surprise (yes yes, with a few exceptions), and is the most eye-poppingly gorgeous desktop I've ever seen, bar none.
I've been back and forth between KDE and Fluxbox since 4.0.0, working through or around or with the bugs as much as possible. And yeah, it's pointy in spots, and yeah, I've reported more bugs in the last six months than I previously had in my life.
But I stick with it, because at least the bugs in KDE are bugs. They are not, generally, flaws, if you catch my distinction there. You know, not to name names or anything ;)
[offtopic]
I'm admittedly pretty annoyed by the colloquial use of "cowboy" in urban centers as a derogatory term.
You know, it's funny this should come up here on Slashdot. I've thought about this a whole lot lately. I think it's a pretty systemic cultural problem that distresses me greatly. As near as I can tell, it stems largely from two things:
1. All mass media in this country comes from New York or LA, with no exceptions. All television, film, and publishing. All of it. So essentially, two cities whose combined population is about 4% of the population of the country are the only ones with any sort of cultural voice. This is Not Good.
2. People who aren't from here have come to identify "cowboy" (or anything having rural or mid-America connotations) with "ignorant bigot fuckstick redneck douchebag." Partially because that's what the TV tells them, and partially because a handful of raving sociopaths (who IMNSHO should all be pulled behind the barn and aired out) seem hellbent on proving them right.
Sorry for the rant here, but like I said, it's been on my mind :)
[/offtopic]
Here's a shorter version: Not everyone likes to do design. F/OSS tends to attract people who like to work on the backend--more interesting and challenging things, that is--than to work on the user interface. They'll do the latter, usually because no one else will, but it's not necessarily something they're going to enjoy.
I don't think I agree with this, or at least I don't agree with it anymore. Just looking at the new KDE, the thought and labor that went into the interface has been incredible. It's not just coders doing this stuff for themselves anymore. Take a look at the credits. That's a hell of a lot of people.
I suspect you're probably from either the left or right coast. Only stuffy Urbanites would find "cowboy" derogatory. ;)
As a midwesterner, I had to smile at this. Well said :)