We are talking about Microsoft Office. According to the Microsoft Office site, Publisher is considered a component of Microsoft Office.
From Microsoft's site:
"Keeping in touch and communicating with customers is essential for any business. A complete business publishing and marketing materials solution, Publisher 2003 can help you reach out to customers. With Publisher 2003, it's easier than ever to design, create, and publish professional marketing and communication materials in-house."
This appears (to me) to be "professional marketing and communications material" --- so why didn't they use the Microsoft Office program Microsoft Publisher on a Microsoft Windows machine?
1] with companies such as novell, hp, ibm, sun (not to mention Red Hat, etc..) seems like this is being taken care of for those that want it. Heck, in some ways it is better as it maintains competition for the support contracts vs having to deal with Microsoft for anything that requires the source.
2] updates are good on both sides.. though it seems like with MS updates, you not only get the bug fix, but additional functionaility or sometimes a completely new program (ie we don't want to patch IE5, upgrade to IE6SP1!). Seems like generally speaking, various patches in FOSS are backported to older versions so you get the security updates without having to deal with changes in functionaility -- more choice.:)
3] I think the corporations getting into offering up Linux will start doing more roadmaps and such... is this necessarily a good thing? I dunno.. probably not. Seems like everyone in the industry already knows essentially what a joke roadmaps are... look at how often they are altered, changed or completely disregarded for a new roadmap a few months later. FOSS does provide the capability to see development as it happens -- so if you are a "stable" person, you can still monitor CVS & developer releases to get an idea of the direction of various projects.
4] True.. there are gaps. Of course, as more people use and promote Linux, these gaps will close -- hopefully fairly quickly. Luckily until that occurs, there are options for people to use things like vmware, wine, crossover office and even rdesktop/terminal services.
5] IP concerns affect the entire industry, not just FOSS. The biggest difference between FOSS and corporations in this regard is FOSS is generally more transparent and open about these issues -- corporations will keep a tight lip about potential uncertainties.
6] I agree with you here. Slashdotters, generally speaking, don't truly understand how decisions are made. Of course, yet again, I'll go back to hp, ibm, novell, etc *hopefully* pushing out the data that DOES speak to managers so when the managers come around with the questions, the long-haired, greasy finger geeks can start the deployments.:-)
However, even with all the reservation and uncertantity that managers have regarding FOSS, it is still being deployed. A firewall here, a print/file server there.. perhaps a desktop or two.. I have deployed several Linux servers for various small businesses. So far, the complaints have been few and far between. It simply works. Hopefully this trend continues and their desire for FOSS solutions outweighs the perceived benefits of alternatives... We'll see.:)
that would be 2283 elephants fed for the entire year.. of course, if your buying 166million lbs of peanuts, I'm just guessing that you could get a better deal than $3/lb...
According to an IDC report, Apple had 3.2% of the 2003 sales market.. so lets assume macs are used on average, twice as long as PCs (doubtful), this would give them a 6.4% desktop market share.. more like it is between the two, so under 5%..
Of course, the majority of those 5% are not corporate desktops, but content creation workstations (video, dtp, music, etc..) so lets say 20% of Macs are corporate desktops (unlikely, but good for comparison) -- and 50% of Windows desktops are corporate...95 x.5 = 47.5% of all desktops are Windows corporate desktops...5 x.2 = 1% of all desktops are Mac corporate desktops..
Ultimatley 2% of all corporate desktops using these numbers off the top of my head are Mac corporate desktops.
Now on a Mac you have a choice -- a brand spankin' new keynote program or PowerPoint or perhap a few other tools that escape my mind at this time.. so lets say at this time, keynote has 50% of the Mac marketshare -- your looking at 1% using Keynote versus the other 99% using powerpoint.
Sure it might be a great program, but merely a speck on the landscape..... Now *hopefully* we see some innovative ideas show up in OOo Impress..:)
After it is all said and done, both the DOJ and EU found MS guilty with regards to their business practices. Read up on some of the DOJvsMS testimony, synoposis, etc..
Essentially MS told OEMs that they were only allowed to preload MS Windows on their systems. Infact, in many circumstances, it was not only MS Windows, but Microsoft's other software that was not the industry leading software at a particular time. Effectively MS was leveraging their OS dominance to enter other markets (office, media player, internet explorer, outlook, etc..) -- MS would REQUIRE OEMs to bundle MS only software with their systems and if they did not agree, were not given any discount. period. end of story.
Honestly, what is a business to do? It builds up on MS because of the original MS/IBM deal then MS turns around and limits the choices that the OEMs can make with regards to their business. Obviously OEMs cannot simply stop offering windows, that would be corporate suicide -- however, at the same time, they are restricted by not being able to provide their customers with alternative software.
Granted, a lot of this has changed after DOJvsMS, but needless to say, the damage has already been done. Now MS has been utilizing things such as the BSA, software audits and fines to end-users to force them into things such as the MS Software Assurance Program (upgrade within a certain time or pay full price..) and other such tactics.
I am glad to see IBM, Novell/SuSE, HP and others pushing Linux on the desktop. Hopefully this will provide a valid second option for many of the small businesses that currently are truly locked into the MS platform.
In general, many smaller and mid sized businesses don't have a choice when it comes to their computing platform. The simple fact is there is a significant amount of applications that are only available on Windows.
Support for non-Windows platforms is significantly reduced. Laptops and certain hardware only comes with Windows preinstalled/tested.
As a result, as you mentioned, some of the hardware does not work --- why you think this is not the OEM's issue is beyond me -- Dell could easily state they will only use hardware from vendors that has open source drivers available and that are tested with Linux, BSD, whatever.. however, promoting Linux would essentially kill the business -- Microsoft would jack up the prices substantially and not allow Dell to compete effectively in the market. (This is the #1 issue I have the most problem with)
Ultimately I have a FreeBSD/KDE desktop and the majority of the software I need is available for FreeBSD. The more I utilize my platform of choice, the more I am pleased with my choice. Unfortunately for many companies, software they use is simply not available for any platform besides Windows and in many cases, there is no equivilent software (I am talking in particular to industry specific business software -- ledger, accounting, scheduling, etc..)
Of course, it is getting better. Over the past few years, Mozilla has become the leading browser in terms of standards compliance and features. OpenOffice.org is a viable office suite that can be used by a huge array of users. KDE is a great desktop and comes with excellent applications such as Kontact, Kopete, Konqueror, Juk, KPlayer, encryption integration (KGPG),etc.. There is no need to run resource intensive virus scanners, spyware blasters and other kludges.
I promote FOSS whenever applicable -- installing Windows ports for people to utilize inside businesses, demoing Knoppix and the KDE desktop, showing some basic cost numbers, etc.. Ultimately I hope to make people a bit more aware of alternatives and start to demand the utilization of standards compliant, cross platform software.
Ford (Microsoft) has 90% of the market. Gas stations have pumps (hardware/drivers) that only work on Fords and virtually all dealers (dell, gateway, etc..) will only sell you a Ford. Parking spots, roadways.. heck even your music system and the repair shops use Ford as the defacto standard. Of course, Ford has patents and strong arm tactics to maintain its position in the market.
You could buy a Toyota (Red Hat). Unfortunately when you do, you realize that you end up having to find different pumps to get gas (which are few and far between), cannot buy a Toyota fully assembled (computer w/Red Hat installed) and end up having to buy a Ford (Wintel machine) and installing Toyota parts (Red Hat & software). Of course, even after you have your Toyota and you realize it is better (more fuel efficient, more reliable, more features, etc..), you find that Ford's dominance adversely affects the full potential of your Toyota. You no longer can use the local pumps down the street, you end up having to do maintenance by yourself (as very few if any of the shops will service your Toyota), and worse of all, your favorite parking spots, streets and music (software) is not supported full on the Toyota so you end up either having to find completely new music, new places to drive and new parking spots or end up simply being constrained on where you can go.
The bottom line is this -- cars don't work this way. I had a Honda and bought a Toyota. My CDs still worked in in, I could still get the same gas, drive the same roads, park in the same parking spots. The basic fundamental "user interface" is the same -- perhaps laid out slightly different. I can get it serviced at a wide variety of places, get the oil changed at the neighborhood gas station. No problems.
Unfortunately, when talking about computer system choice, this is obviously not as "drop in and go" as you make it out to be. The fact that Microsoft monopolized the market, coerced OEMs into supporting only MS products (bundling deals and the like), effectively dumps their product to get people hooked and does not follow industry standards to maintain a certain level of lock-in adversely affects everyone.
[Scene Initech. Bob Slydell and Bob Porter are interviewing Tom.]
BOB SLYDELL: So what you do is you take the specifications from the customers and you bring them down to the software engineers?
TOM: That, that's right.
BOB PORTER: Well, then I gotta ask, then why can't the customers just take the specifications directly to the software people, huh?
TOM: Well, uh, uh, uh, because, uh, engineers are not good at dealing with customers.
BOB SLYDELL: You physically take the specs from the customer?
TOM: Well, no, my, my secretary does that, or, or the fax.
BOB SLYDELL: Ah.
BOB PORTER: Then you must physically bring them to the software people.
TOM: Well...no. Yeah, I mean, sometimes.
BOB SLYDELL: Well, what would you say... you do here?
TOM: Well, look, I already told you. I deal with the goddamn customers so the engineers don't have to!! I have people skills!! I am good at dealing with people!!! Can't you understand that?!? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!!!!!!!
- Wallet - makes storing passwords for KDE apps & websites secure and easy to manage. - Konquerer - has tabbed browsing and other modern browser features, IE does not have these. - Juk - great playlist based music player -- What does XP come with? Media Player? no thanks. - Windows can be "shaded", "always on top", borders removed, made to fill the entire screen, etc.. kinda nice IMHO.. - Advanced keybindings - KDE-wide spell check.. very nice when typing in browser windows, etc.. - Advanced, built in editors such as Quanta, Kate, etc.. - Great multi-client IM (Kopete) - OpenPGP encryption integration -- works great with Kopete, Kontact, etc..etc.. - Virtual desktops, fine-tuning over multi-monitor setups, etc.. - IMHO, great print subsystem (kprinter/cups) -- certains aspects of W2k/XP seemed umm.. hacked on (ie usb printer setups) - Nice to look at Window decoration & widgets (plastik) - User-level font management control -- I don't think XP has this (only global fonts) - flexible sized panels (kicker/taskbar) -- make as many as you want, have them wherever you want, what size you want, etc... - kioslaves -- use of fish:/ is awesome -- utilize remote servers via SSH as if they were local file systems.. - General responsiveness and speed seems better than XP -- XP seems to umm.. delay quite a bit for no apparent reason (ie 10-15 seconds or more at a time)
Of course, these are just some of the things I like about KDE over XP.. But since you sound like a KDE user, you probably already utilize most of these features. Just be glad your using KDE:)
The only thing they get is the bottom line.. the biggest issues with Windows is spyware & viruses (for the majority of people). These are HUGE issues for both home and business users.
Here is what I see -->
My KDE 3.2 desktop ease of use is right up there with other operating systems.. I have people using my system all the time -- everything from children to senior citizens (70+). The fact that I can install Linux MUCH EASIER than Windows (pop in Knoppix CD and initiate a HD install) and it doesn't have the two biggest problems that Windows has (spyware & viruses) and it has the "major apps" that are needed (web browsing, spreadsheets, word processors, email, im, etc..) is HUGE.
Microsoft is definitely getting it -- if they don't release quality products, their market share will erode.
I agree with you -- various desktop centric distributions are putting money and resouces into locating people who are focused on usability.
Desktop Linux is still relatively young. Compared to the 20+ year Macintosh and Windows histories, Linux still definitely has some growth to do in this area.
However, unlike the Macintosh and Windows, Linux is working in the opposite direction -- instead of starting with a clean slate and catering to the end user first, Linux focused on the tech savvy, network administrator and is now getting into the desktop. As a result, there is a LOT of tough decisions that have to be made as to the best way to integrate many complex, feature rich services into easy to use GUI driven programs.
So what is the best way to accomplish this? Well in my opinion, don't let the core developers of these various projects (apache, cups, etc..) worry about the configuration interfaces -- this should be handled by the distros or desktop environment (kde/gnome) people.
Personally I would like to see kde/gnome integrate as many GUI configuration tools as possible for these various apps.. This would allow for consistency between different distributions (which I think is important).
I think the KDE team has been doing a great job tackling this very issue.. things like Wallet, KGpg, KPrinter, Control Panel, kCron, kUser, etc are great and continue to improve.
All in all, I am pleased to see the improvements in this area. It is better now than 6 months ago, a year ago and definitely a TON better than when I originally started using a Linux desktop. With companies like IBM and Novell interested in rolling Linux desktops, I would think a lot of resources will be poured in that ultimately smooths the rough edges.
Styles for one, HUGE thing... The Stylist on Open Office makes it so much easier when creating long documents.
Automation in things like table of contents, indexes, etc is more intuitive to me in OOo.. umm.. less clutter - I hate how Word has popups to "assist" me.. Less strange blips (mostly due to the styles based interface) -- ie weird horizontal lines showing up after each carriage return, numbered lists getting out of sync, etc..etc..
Needless to say, I stopped using Word/Excel many months ago and the more I use OOo, the more I realize it is not simply a Microsoft Office knockoff, but a very complete and functional office suite that assists rather than inhibits my ability to get my work completed.
Sure, it is a bit slow on startup, but I tend to have it running all the time (in reality Windows runs much of the Office suite in the background as well, just the user isn't aware of it..)
Bottom line? Great office suite, perhaps not as polished as Microsoft Office, but I definitely rate the fundamental design of the suite MUCH higher than MS Office..
So whats better? AAC, WMA, MP3 or OGG?
on
Friday Apple Fun
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Which format is best for my silent recordings?
Re:But isn't language defined by usage?
on
Hackers Hall of Fame
·
· Score: 4, Funny
I think this quote from Office Space sums it up nicely...
SAMIR: How come no one in this country can pronounce my name right? It's Na-gee-een-ah-jah. Nagaenajar
MICHAEL: At least your name isn't Michael Bolton.
SAMIR: Michael, there's nothing wrong with that name.
MICHAEL: There was nothing wrong with it. Until I was about nine years old and that no-talent assclown became famous and started winning Grammys.
SAMIR: Well, why don't just go by Mike, instead of Michael?
MICHAEL: WHY SHOULD I CHANGE IT? HE'S THE ONE WHO SUCKS.
------> why should hackers change their name if others don't get it right? Thats nonsense. Besides, hackers would come up with a better term and the unenlighten will still lump hackers/crackers together.
They should have used an open license font like Bitstream Vera. This would have given them the fixed spaced "Bitstream Vera Sans Mono" for tabular data, "Bitstream Vera Serif" for paragraph and "Bitstream Vera Sans" for headers, captions, etc. Simply beautiful and open.:)
The thing that is nice about access is the fact that everything is integrated in one app. You can setup your tables, queries, forms and reports... generally fairly quickly and easily if you have some basic knowledge of Access.
Granted, the draw back is the default backend -- people start small databases in Access and attempting to go multiuser and running into performance issues, security issues, etc.
For basic stuff like contact management, sales estimates, etc, Access provides a quick and relatively painless way to get up and going fast.
I think this is what people want. If OpenOffice.org would ship with a product similar to Rekall and include a basic database engine + capabilities to tap into corporate databases, that would be a great way to round out the entire OOo suite.
Ways I have used knoppix.. - to backup data from bashed W2K machines to a network drive - to scan a networks for security issues - to test systems for Linux compatibility - to demo linux to people - to show off crossplatform apps - customized as a product demo CD - customized as a read-only server setup - as an aid to test for hard-to-detect hardware issues - as a boot disk to access other Linux boxes - test for server/client configurations
Needless to say, I use Knoppix a LOT. I have created lots of Knoppix disks and promote it to anyone who has an interest in learning about or who uses Linux. I have found it to be awesome at detecting a wide variety of hardware and a great "second opinion" when troubleshooting a Windows box for hardware issues.. pop in Knoppix and see if the hardware exhibits the same problems.
I was thinking the same exact thing.. e-smith is a very nice small business/organization multi-purpose server. I have installed quite a few of those boxes (inplace of NT boxes or new installs) and customers are very impressed with the functionaility, reliability and ease of use.
While I agree that a decision must be made between KDE or Gnome for many reasons (less variations in deployed systems, consistency across the application base, ability to draw in more commercial support, etc..) I question the rational for simply discarding KDE due to commercial licensing cost.
Big advantages that I hear over and over again for QT is the consistent API, fast development time, ease of cross platform development, etc. Things that in and of themselves are very important when developing any type of software.
While I am not in a position to determine the relative strengths and weaknesses of each toolkit, I believe that this analysis NEEDS to be done before simply zeroing in on cost for commercial software development and discarding what is the #1 or #2 *nix desktop environment. It might cost some money for developers if they release commercial software, but if they are able to develop it faster, be able to port it to multiple platforms, and have cleaner code (due to a consistent, easy to use API).. doesn't that justify the relatively small costs?
I think it comes down to compensation. I have yet to see a compensation methodology for system administrators that encourages the security and reliability minded attributes you are looking for.
Lets face it.. if a sys admin is truly mindful of these attributes, they can generally avoid the majority of viruses/worms/exploits/etc. Infact, many of the tools that they use for their job can easiy be scriptable, scheduled, etc to the point where they don't really have to do a whole heck of a lot except for monitoring the system.
However, if they do this, generally they are perceived as "not doing anything", get smaller budgets to work with, less staff, etc.
So where is the benefit? If security is laxed and the occasional virus hits the systems or computers are less reliable than they should be, then the sys admin is seen as the "hero" for fixing the problems. No problems = out of sight = out of mind.
The problem is even worse for part-timer/hourly sys admins... if they are really good at their job, they can usually setup systems, maintain them remotely when necessary and generally not have to worry about them very much. Again, less $$ for them for doing a good job.
As a sys admin I tend to want to setup systems correctly, maintain high security on critical infrastructure aspects and work in such a way that supports the rest of the organization. However, I have yet to determine a way to properly compensate for a job "well done"..
I noticed you were +5 funny.. perhaps people don't realize you are dead serious. I use to work a very similar job..
It is one thing for someone to uses the wrong tool for a job the first time --- perhaps they were unaware of the correct tools, etc.. but after they have to spend hundreds/thousands more to correct the problem (reformatting in Indesign, reworking the low resolution clipart/images, etc..), you'd think they would take our advise and run with it. But no.. they have continued to submit powerpoint.
If someone is intent on sending out mass mailing spam, they have LOTS of ways to accomplish this and I'm guessing by having an ISP limit outgoing messages in an effort to reduce spam is not going to stop them.
This type of a system could be effective in detecting and disabling accounts that are infected, zombies or unintentially sending out spam. While it would be nice if everyone was a "good netizen" and maintained their systems and was security minded.. its not going to happen. A system like this, if it is well designed, could be very effective and not inconvience legitmate heavy email users (mailing lists, CC/BCC, queued mailed, etc..).
Slashdot Mirror
We are talking about Microsoft Office. According to the Microsoft Office site, Publisher is considered a component of Microsoft Office.
From Microsoft's site:
"Keeping in touch and communicating with customers is essential for any business. A complete business publishing and marketing materials solution, Publisher 2003 can help you reach out to customers. With Publisher 2003, it's easier than ever to design, create, and publish professional marketing and communication materials in-house."
This appears (to me) to be "professional marketing and communications material" --- so why didn't they use the Microsoft Office program Microsoft Publisher on a Microsoft Windows machine?
1] with companies such as novell, hp, ibm, sun (not to mention Red Hat, etc..) seems like this is being taken care of for those that want it. Heck, in some ways it is better as it maintains competition for the support contracts vs having to deal with Microsoft for anything that requires the source.
:)
... is this necessarily a good thing? I dunno.. probably not. Seems like everyone in the industry already knows essentially what a joke roadmaps are ... look at how often they are altered, changed or completely disregarded for a new roadmap a few months later. FOSS does provide the capability to see development as it happens -- so if you are a "stable" person, you can still monitor CVS & developer releases to get an idea of the direction of various projects.
.. there are gaps. Of course, as more people use and promote Linux, these gaps will close -- hopefully fairly quickly. Luckily until that occurs, there are options for people to use things like vmware, wine, crossover office and even rdesktop/terminal services.
:-)
.. perhaps a desktop or two.. I have deployed several Linux servers for various small businesses. So far, the complaints have been few and far between. It simply works. Hopefully this trend continues and their desire for FOSS solutions outweighs the perceived benefits of alternatives... We'll see. :)
2] updates are good on both sides.. though it seems like with MS updates, you not only get the bug fix, but additional functionaility or sometimes a completely new program (ie we don't want to patch IE5, upgrade to IE6SP1!). Seems like generally speaking, various patches in FOSS are backported to older versions so you get the security updates without having to deal with changes in functionaility -- more choice.
3] I think the corporations getting into offering up Linux will start doing more roadmaps and such
4] True
5] IP concerns affect the entire industry, not just FOSS. The biggest difference between FOSS and corporations in this regard is FOSS is generally more transparent and open about these issues -- corporations will keep a tight lip about potential uncertainties.
6] I agree with you here. Slashdotters, generally speaking, don't truly understand how decisions are made. Of course, yet again, I'll go back to hp, ibm, novell, etc *hopefully* pushing out the data that DOES speak to managers so when the managers come around with the questions, the long-haired, greasy finger geeks can start the deployments.
However, even with all the reservation and uncertantity that managers have regarding FOSS, it is still being deployed. A firewall here, a print/file server there
Wah??
...
that would be 2283 elephants fed for the entire year.. of course, if your buying 166million lbs of peanuts, I'm just guessing that you could get a better deal than $3/lb
According to an IDC report, Apple had 3.2% of the 2003 sales market.. so lets assume macs are used on average, twice as long as PCs (doubtful), this would give them a 6.4% desktop market share .. more like it is between the two, so under 5%..
.95 x .5 = 47.5% of all desktops are Windows corporate desktops.. .5 x .2 = 1% of all desktops are Mac corporate desktops..
:)
Of course, the majority of those 5% are not corporate desktops, but content creation workstations (video, dtp, music, etc..) so lets say 20% of Macs are corporate desktops (unlikely, but good for comparison) -- and 50% of Windows desktops are corporate..
Ultimatley 2% of all corporate desktops using these numbers off the top of my head are Mac corporate desktops.
Now on a Mac you have a choice -- a brand spankin' new keynote program or PowerPoint or perhap a few other tools that escape my mind at this time.. so lets say at this time, keynote has 50% of the Mac marketshare -- your looking at 1% using Keynote versus the other 99% using powerpoint.
Sure it might be a great program, but merely a speck on the landscape..... Now *hopefully* we see some innovative ideas show up in OOo Impress..
After it is all said and done, both the DOJ and EU found MS guilty with regards to their business practices. Read up on some of the DOJvsMS testimony, synoposis, etc..
Essentially MS told OEMs that they were only allowed to preload MS Windows on their systems. Infact, in many circumstances, it was not only MS Windows, but Microsoft's other software that was not the industry leading software at a particular time. Effectively MS was leveraging their OS dominance to enter other markets (office, media player, internet explorer, outlook, etc..) -- MS would REQUIRE OEMs to bundle MS only software with their systems and if they did not agree, were not given any discount. period. end of story.
Honestly, what is a business to do? It builds up on MS because of the original MS/IBM deal then MS turns around and limits the choices that the OEMs can make with regards to their business. Obviously OEMs cannot simply stop offering windows, that would be corporate suicide -- however, at the same time, they are restricted by not being able to provide their customers with alternative software.
Granted, a lot of this has changed after DOJvsMS, but needless to say, the damage has already been done. Now MS has been utilizing things such as the BSA, software audits and fines to end-users to force them into things such as the MS Software Assurance Program (upgrade within a certain time or pay full price..) and other such tactics.
I am glad to see IBM, Novell/SuSE, HP and others pushing Linux on the desktop. Hopefully this will provide a valid second option for many of the small businesses that currently are truly locked into the MS platform.
In general, many smaller and mid sized businesses don't have a choice when it comes to their computing platform. The simple fact is there is a significant amount of applications that are only available on Windows.
Support for non-Windows platforms is significantly reduced. Laptops and certain hardware only comes with Windows preinstalled/tested.
As a result, as you mentioned, some of the hardware does not work --- why you think this is not the OEM's issue is beyond me -- Dell could easily state they will only use hardware from vendors that has open source drivers available and that are tested with Linux, BSD, whatever.. however, promoting Linux would essentially kill the business -- Microsoft would jack up the prices substantially and not allow Dell to compete effectively in the market. (This is the #1 issue I have the most problem with)
Ultimately I have a FreeBSD/KDE desktop and the majority of the software I need is available for FreeBSD. The more I utilize my platform of choice, the more I am pleased with my choice. Unfortunately for many companies, software they use is simply not available for any platform besides Windows and in many cases, there is no equivilent software (I am talking in particular to industry specific business software -- ledger, accounting, scheduling, etc..)
Of course, it is getting better. Over the past few years, Mozilla has become the leading browser in terms of standards compliance and features. OpenOffice.org is a viable office suite that can be used by a huge array of users. KDE is a great desktop and comes with excellent applications such as Kontact, Kopete, Konqueror, Juk, KPlayer, encryption integration (KGPG),etc.. There is no need to run resource intensive virus scanners, spyware blasters and other kludges.
I promote FOSS whenever applicable -- installing Windows ports for people to utilize inside businesses, demoing Knoppix and the KDE desktop, showing some basic cost numbers, etc.. Ultimately I hope to make people a bit more aware of alternatives and start to demand the utilization of standards compliant, cross platform software.
Lets take the analogy a bit further..
.. heck even your music system and the repair shops use Ford as the defacto standard. Of course, Ford has patents and strong arm tactics to maintain its position in the market.
Ford (Microsoft) has 90% of the market. Gas stations have pumps (hardware/drivers) that only work on Fords and virtually all dealers (dell, gateway, etc..) will only sell you a Ford. Parking spots, roadways
You could buy a Toyota (Red Hat). Unfortunately when you do, you realize that you end up having to find different pumps to get gas (which are few and far between), cannot buy a Toyota fully assembled (computer w/Red Hat installed) and end up having to buy a Ford (Wintel machine) and installing Toyota parts (Red Hat & software). Of course, even after you have your Toyota and you realize it is better (more fuel efficient, more reliable, more features, etc..), you find that Ford's dominance adversely affects the full potential of your Toyota. You no longer can use the local pumps down the street, you end up having to do maintenance by yourself (as very few if any of the shops will service your Toyota), and worse of all, your favorite parking spots, streets and music (software) is not supported full on the Toyota so you end up either having to find completely new music, new places to drive and new parking spots or end up simply being constrained on where you can go.
The bottom line is this -- cars don't work this way. I had a Honda and bought a Toyota. My CDs still worked in in, I could still get the same gas, drive the same roads, park in the same parking spots. The basic fundamental "user interface" is the same -- perhaps laid out slightly different. I can get it serviced at a wide variety of places, get the oil changed at the neighborhood gas station. No problems.
Unfortunately, when talking about computer system choice, this is obviously not as "drop in and go" as you make it out to be. The fact that Microsoft monopolized the market, coerced OEMs into supporting only MS products (bundling deals and the like), effectively dumps their product to get people hooked and does not follow industry standards to maintain a certain level of lock-in adversely affects everyone.
[Scene Initech. Bob Slydell and Bob Porter are interviewing Tom.]
BOB SLYDELL: So what you do is you take the specifications from the customers and you bring them down to the software engineers?
TOM: That, that's right.
BOB PORTER: Well, then I gotta ask, then why can't the customers just take the specifications directly to the software people, huh?
TOM: Well, uh, uh, uh, because, uh, engineers are not good at dealing with
customers.
BOB SLYDELL: You physically take the specs from the customer?
TOM: Well, no, my, my secretary does that, or, or the fax.
BOB SLYDELL: Ah.
BOB PORTER: Then you must physically bring them to the software people.
TOM: Well...no. Yeah, I mean, sometimes.
BOB SLYDELL: Well, what would you say... you do here?
TOM: Well, look, I already told you. I deal with the goddamn customers so the engineers don't have to!! I have people skills!! I am good at dealing with people!!! Can't you understand that?!? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!!!!!!!
Well I'll give it a go..
.. very nice when typing in browser windows, etc..
.. But since you sound like a KDE user, you probably already utilize most of these features. Just be glad your using KDE :)
Pros for KDE -->
- Wallet - makes storing passwords for KDE apps & websites secure and easy to manage.
- Konquerer - has tabbed browsing and other modern browser features, IE does not have these.
- Juk - great playlist based music player -- What does XP come with? Media Player? no thanks.
- Windows can be "shaded", "always on top", borders removed, made to fill the entire screen, etc.. kinda nice IMHO..
- Advanced keybindings
- KDE-wide spell check
- Advanced, built in editors such as Quanta, Kate, etc..
- Great multi-client IM (Kopete)
- OpenPGP encryption integration -- works great with Kopete, Kontact, etc..etc..
- Virtual desktops, fine-tuning over multi-monitor setups, etc..
- IMHO, great print subsystem (kprinter/cups) -- certains aspects of W2k/XP seemed umm.. hacked on (ie usb printer setups)
- Nice to look at Window decoration & widgets (plastik)
- User-level font management control -- I don't think XP has this (only global fonts)
- flexible sized panels (kicker/taskbar) -- make as many as you want, have them wherever you want, what size you want, etc...
- kioslaves -- use of fish:/ is awesome -- utilize remote servers via SSH as if they were local file systems..
- General responsiveness and speed seems better than XP -- XP seems to umm.. delay quite a bit for no apparent reason (ie 10-15 seconds or more at a time)
Of course, these are just some of the things I like about KDE over XP
The only thing they get is the bottom line.. the biggest issues with Windows is spyware & viruses (for the majority of people). These are HUGE issues for both home and business users.
.. I have people using my system all the time -- everything from children to senior citizens (70+). The fact that I can install Linux MUCH EASIER than Windows (pop in Knoppix CD and initiate a HD install) and it doesn't have the two biggest problems that Windows has (spyware & viruses) and it has the "major apps" that are needed (web browsing, spreadsheets, word processors, email, im, etc..) is HUGE.
Here is what I see -->
My KDE 3.2 desktop ease of use is right up there with other operating systems
Microsoft is definitely getting it -- if they don't release quality products, their market share will erode.
I agree with you -- various desktop centric distributions are putting money and resouces into locating people who are focused on usability.
.. things like Wallet, KGpg, KPrinter, Control Panel, kCron, kUser, etc are great and continue to improve.
Desktop Linux is still relatively young. Compared to the 20+ year Macintosh and Windows histories, Linux still definitely has some growth to do in this area.
However, unlike the Macintosh and Windows, Linux is working in the opposite direction -- instead of starting with a clean slate and catering to the end user first, Linux focused on the tech savvy, network administrator and is now getting into the desktop. As a result, there is a LOT of tough decisions that have to be made as to the best way to integrate many complex, feature rich services into easy to use GUI driven programs.
So what is the best way to accomplish this? Well in my opinion, don't let the core developers of these various projects (apache, cups, etc..) worry about the configuration interfaces -- this should be handled by the distros or desktop environment (kde/gnome) people.
Personally I would like to see kde/gnome integrate as many GUI configuration tools as possible for these various apps.. This would allow for consistency between different distributions (which I think is important).
I think the KDE team has been doing a great job tackling this very issue
All in all, I am pleased to see the improvements in this area. It is better now than 6 months ago, a year ago and definitely a TON better than when I originally started using a Linux desktop. With companies like IBM and Novell interested in rolling Linux desktops, I would think a lot of resources will be poured in that ultimately smooths the rough edges.
Styles for one, HUGE thing ... The Stylist on Open Office makes it so much easier when creating long documents.
.. umm.. less clutter - I hate how Word has popups to "assist" me .. Less strange blips (mostly due to the styles based interface) -- ie weird horizontal lines showing up after each carriage return, numbered lists getting out of sync, etc..etc..
Automation in things like table of contents, indexes, etc is more intuitive to me in OOo
Needless to say, I stopped using Word/Excel many months ago and the more I use OOo, the more I realize it is not simply a Microsoft Office knockoff, but a very complete and functional office suite that assists rather than inhibits my ability to get my work completed.
Sure, it is a bit slow on startup, but I tend to have it running all the time (in reality Windows runs much of the Office suite in the background as well, just the user isn't aware of it..)
Bottom line? Great office suite, perhaps not as polished as Microsoft Office, but I definitely rate the fundamental design of the suite MUCH higher than MS Office..
Which format is best for my silent recordings?
I think this quote from Office Space sums it up nicely...
SAMIR: How come no one in this country can pronounce my name right? It's Na-gee-een-ah-jah. Nagaenajar
MICHAEL: At least your name isn't Michael Bolton.
SAMIR: Michael, there's nothing wrong with that name.
MICHAEL: There was nothing wrong with it. Until I was about nine years old and that no-talent assclown became famous and started winning Grammys.
SAMIR: Well, why don't just go by Mike, instead of Michael?
MICHAEL: WHY SHOULD I CHANGE IT? HE'S THE ONE WHO SUCKS.
------> why should hackers change their name if others don't get it right? Thats nonsense. Besides, hackers would come up with a better term and the unenlighten will still lump hackers/crackers together.
They should have used an open license font like Bitstream Vera. This would have given them the fixed spaced "Bitstream Vera Sans Mono" for tabular data, "Bitstream Vera Serif" for paragraph and "Bitstream Vera Sans" for headers, captions, etc. Simply beautiful and open. :)
The thing that is nice about access is the fact that everything is integrated in one app. You can setup your tables, queries, forms and reports. .. generally fairly quickly and easily if you have some basic knowledge of Access.
Granted, the draw back is the default backend -- people start small databases in Access and attempting to go multiuser and running into performance issues, security issues, etc.
For basic stuff like contact management, sales estimates, etc, Access provides a quick and relatively painless way to get up and going fast.
I think this is what people want. If OpenOffice.org would ship with a product similar to Rekall and include a basic database engine + capabilities to tap into corporate databases, that would be a great way to round out the entire OOo suite.
Ways I have used knoppix..
.. pop in Knoppix and see if the hardware exhibits the same problems.
- to backup data from bashed W2K machines to a network drive
- to scan a networks for security issues
- to test systems for Linux compatibility
- to demo linux to people
- to show off crossplatform apps
- customized as a product demo CD
- customized as a read-only server setup
- as an aid to test for hard-to-detect hardware issues
- as a boot disk to access other Linux boxes
- test for server/client configurations
Needless to say, I use Knoppix a LOT. I have created lots of Knoppix disks and promote it to anyone who has an interest in learning about or who uses Linux. I have found it to be awesome at detecting a wide variety of hardware and a great "second opinion" when troubleshooting a Windows box for hardware issues
I'll second this. I have one hooked up via CUPS to service my home network (5 PCs).. works great, fast, etc..
Hmm.. no... you forgot a /60 (60 minutes in an hour)
..
... which is ~19.45 days ..
so the correct answer would be
~0.0533 years
I was thinking the same exact thing.. e-smith is a very nice small business/organization multi-purpose server. I have installed quite a few of those boxes (inplace of NT boxes or new installs) and customers are very impressed with the functionaility, reliability and ease of use.
Sure its a format .. when I installed Windows 2000 it asked:
:)
Format:
NTFS
FAT32
While I agree that a decision must be made between KDE or Gnome for many reasons (less variations in deployed systems, consistency across the application base, ability to draw in more commercial support, etc..) I question the rational for simply discarding KDE due to commercial licensing cost.
.. doesn't that justify the relatively small costs?
Big advantages that I hear over and over again for QT is the consistent API, fast development time, ease of cross platform development, etc. Things that in and of themselves are very important when developing any type of software.
While I am not in a position to determine the relative strengths and weaknesses of each toolkit, I believe that this analysis NEEDS to be done before simply zeroing in on cost for commercial software development and discarding what is the #1 or #2 *nix desktop environment. It might cost some money for developers if they release commercial software, but if they are able to develop it faster, be able to port it to multiple platforms, and have cleaner code (due to a consistent, easy to use API)
I think it comes down to compensation. I have yet to see a compensation methodology for system administrators that encourages the security and reliability minded attributes you are looking for.
.. if a sys admin is truly mindful of these attributes, they can generally avoid the majority of viruses/worms/exploits/etc. Infact, many of the tools that they use for their job can easiy be scriptable, scheduled, etc to the point where they don't really have to do a whole heck of a lot except for monitoring the system.
... if they are really good at their job, they can usually setup systems, maintain them remotely when necessary and generally not have to worry about them very much. Again, less $$ for them for doing a good job.
..
Lets face it
However, if they do this, generally they are perceived as "not doing anything", get smaller budgets to work with, less staff, etc.
So where is the benefit? If security is laxed and the occasional virus hits the systems or computers are less reliable than they should be, then the sys admin is seen as the "hero" for fixing the problems. No problems = out of sight = out of mind.
The problem is even worse for part-timer/hourly sys admins
As a sys admin I tend to want to setup systems correctly, maintain high security on critical infrastructure aspects and work in such a way that supports the rest of the organization. However, I have yet to determine a way to properly compensate for a job "well done"
Any thoughts?
I noticed you were +5 funny .. perhaps people don't realize you are dead serious. I use to work a very similar job ..
.. they have continued to submit powerpoint.
It is one thing for someone to uses the wrong tool for a job the first time --- perhaps they were unaware of the correct tools, etc.. but after they have to spend hundreds/thousands more to correct the problem (reformatting in Indesign, reworking the low resolution clipart/images, etc..), you'd think they would take our advise and run with it. But no
augh. some people never learn.
If someone is intent on sending out mass mailing spam, they have LOTS of ways to accomplish this and I'm guessing by having an ISP limit outgoing messages in an effort to reduce spam is not going to stop them.
This type of a system could be effective in detecting and disabling accounts that are infected, zombies or unintentially sending out spam. While it would be nice if everyone was a "good netizen" and maintained their systems and was security minded.. its not going to happen. A system like this, if it is well designed, could be very effective and not inconvience legitmate heavy email users (mailing lists, CC/BCC, queued mailed, etc..).