Because there are other machines on the network accessing the share, and I don't want to export it with SMB and NFS simultaneously because of permissions problems.
First of all Windows does have remote administration capabilities. They're not turned on by default. So, I'd figure in a big company that would all be possible. Second, just because Linux has a feature Windows lacks does not excuse having a horrible user interface.
I agree wholeheartedly with you on the file associations thing. It shouldn't matter that it's an SMB share. But, and I encourage you to test this for yourself, it *does* in fact seem to matter to Gnome.
The lack of flash support makes it so I cant use a particular website I must use for work, so, here I am back on Windows. A desktop computer needs to support the major technologies out there. Failing to do so sends people back to Windows.
I used Fedora Core 5. I too am a very experienced Linux user. I have a Linux server running right here that has an uptime of over 600 days.
Basically, my experience confirmed what numerous others have posted in reply to my original post on here. Linux is great for server and development, but not for desktop.
I dont want to get into some huge thing here, but here's some info. I used Fedora Core 5. I'm extremely familiar with Linux, having used it to do development and as a server platform continuously since 1995. It's the best platform for those two tasks, in my opinion, bar none.
So, I decided to try using it as a desktop product, now that I'm doing more "office" type tasks. Those elements I found very difficult, as described in my original post. Some stuff I figured out, after fooling around with config files. Other things I just couldn't fix. An example is the fact that when you're using OpenOffice Calc and try to save a file to an SMB share, it pops up windows about not being able to save a backup copy of the file. Yes, I checked all the permissions. Yes, I mounted the SMB share both by using Gnome's built-in smb:// interface and just sticking it in fstab. No, I don't have time to go through OOo's source code and fix the bug. I have a job.
Just installing the thing and getting a good set of apps on it took about 8 hours. I followed a guide posted online. It worked well, but that's 8 hours I'll never get back.
I think people are fooling themselves when they say people are just more familiar with Windows. As between Windows and OSX, I can accept that argument, since in my experience OSX works pretty well. Gnome and KDE are a different story. It's not just familiarity. It's the fact that they have serious bugs and problems that affect everyday users and make using them really hard.
How about instead of moderating my post as "flamebait", giving me some insight into how I'm wrong.
To be clear, I *WANT* to use Linux as my desktop. I've used Linux for development purposes since 1995, and I'm a big fan of open source. I'm not trying to start a flamewar; I'm trying to understand how we could have a meaningful alternative to Linux.
That's actually false. It's about 50-50 between Windows and Office. I used to think the same thing until I read through MS's annual report and 10-K one year.
As an experiment, I recently tried switching to a Gnome-based Linux system to replace my Windows desktop. I do a bunch of fairly standard office tasks -- spreadsheets, word processing, email, etc. But I do have some specific needs, such as needing to use a particular scanner, save files to a SMB share, etc.
Using Linux was an unmitigated disaster. Things that seem like absolutely basic functionality don't work right. I spent literally 40+ hours poring over online forums trying to figure out how to get pieces of software to work right together. OpenOffice pops up random dialog boxes when you try to save to a file share, Flash doesn't really work right on Linux under Firefox, Evolution doesn't like having its email repository stored on a share, etc, etc.
Then there are the user interface difficulties. Windows and OSX are the only 2 OSes I'm aware of where companies actually have done meaningful user testing to verify what works and what doesn't. Gnome and KDE are nice window managers, but they're just not set up right for office tasks. Sure I can sit around and change everything from the icons' sizes to the taskbar size, but who wants to spend days configuring their computer like that?
And don't even get me started on file associations (what program runs when you double-click on a file with a given extension). No matter what I tried, I couldn't get Gnome to let me change the file associations for files on an SMB share. And, it's absolutely opaque how to change them for regular files too without resorting to editing text files in/usr/share/blahblah.
As for this perceived threat from webapps, I don't think Microsoft should be worried at all. Even the mighty Google knows that trying to reimplement MS Office using Ajax would be an absolute disaster. And, think about it. How would I make my scanner scan files into Word? Does Javascript have an Ajax routine "useScanner()"? How about if I want to fax something to someone?
Personally, I dislike Microsoft's monopolist tactics. But, I have to admit, Windows is a better office OS than Linux (Gnome or KDE), and it's not even close. It's just that simple.
The funny thing about this stuff is that, except at the super-elite level, it's not proven to help very much. And, even guys like Tiger Woods don't really use equipment like this all that much. They spend most of their practice time either putting or working on specific shot situations on a real course.
That's not to mention the fact that in golf a fair bit of the skill is in knowing what to do, not just how to do it.
What I don't understand is the pervasiveness of the Blackberry product for email. Email is an extremely simple application for a client to do, requiring just a simple TCP/IP stack and the ability to do either POP3 or IMAP. I believe that most cellphones now have some email capability built into them. Also, there exist plenty of WAP web-based email platforms out there.
That leaves just the mini-keyboard interface as the big deal in the space. Personally, I'm not all that impressed by that as an input mechanism. But, if people like it, why isn't it copied all over the place? Is the concept of a little QWERTY keyboard seriously patented? Also, what about all those other ideas like having two letters assigned to each keyboard button and then having the phone sort it out based on what it thinks you're probably trying to type? Or something like a chording keyboard (though that would require learning)?
So anyway, what's the big deal with Blackberry in particular. Why is this stuff so hard/interesting/compelling?
Thanks for clarifying that, cowens. I get so tired of these Google fanboys who can't imagine there's anything useful that hasn't already been implemented by AdWords. Obviously, Slashdot didn't love my reasoning on this one, but I think it's pretty clear no one really knows how much clickfraud there is without a controlled study.
Really? How do you create a control group? I'm imagining you might have to literally hire real people to use the net and watch them to see when/if they buy stuff.
I personally think there are many, many forms of click-fraud which remain pretty much undetectable to the search engines and ad networks.
The only sure-fire way to detect click fraud in its various forms is to take a look at the click-to-transaction ratio for a given ad. Of course, the only way to really know if there's fraud is to have some way of having a control group. What that would do is let you say something akin to "If someone clicks this particular travel ad, there's an xyz% probability that person will make a purchase, and the average purchase will be $abc."
I don't think there's any company out there doing this kind of controlled experimentation to determine true click-fraud rates, but I believe that's eventually what people will have to do.
I think you can always argue this both ways. For a long time scientists thought that the bigger the brain, the smarter the person. Come to find out there's no significant statistical correlation there.
Also, there are so many different kinds of intelligence that an IQ test is pretty much meaningless. I've worked with plenty of people who had a very high IQ but were completely ineffective either because of psychological weirdnesses or because they couldn't focus enough to get anything done.
This seems like a great test and demonstration of this kind of technology in a relatively extreme environment. I know several people on SlashDot have argued that the machinery wouldn't be able to handle the kinds of conditions you might confront when needing to rescue someone or in a war. This is exactly the kind of demonstration they need to do to push this kind of project forward.
Aside from the obvious comments I know people will make ("Microsoft business intelligence??!?! That's an oxymoron.... OMG PONY!"), I think this is a great deal.
I've thought for some time that Ajax couldn't/doesn't provide all the answers for how to collaborate on various office documents and workflows. While I think there's a place for stuff like Writely, I really believe that 10 years from now most businesses will still be using MS Office or something like it. So, this acquisition will provide those companies with a realistic way to collaborate aon stuff and increase their per-worker productivity.
There are a whole bunch of benefits from this, including making it more possible for people to telecommute, etc. But to me the best part of this news is that it demonstrates that Microsoft is plowing ahead, in the face of all the FUD and vaporware that's being shot out all over the place about Ajax and web-based technologies. Maybe someday the web will get there, but not soon. Not soon.
Obviously you didn't get a degree in economics. Just because something maintains its exact same usefulness doesn't mean that its value doesn't decline. Try telling the guy with the horse-and-buggy in 1910 how he's gonna get another 20 years out of that investment. Or my friend who was conned into buying 3 brand new Apple III computers by a salesman just before the Mac came out. Value is understood in relation to the marketplace, not the "usefulness" of the product.
I love how you turn around and talk about how if Apple preannounced the changeover it would hurt the company. Well, so what? So, they chose to hurt their customers instead. Good work. You sound just like Gil Amelio when I heard him talk at the Apple annual meeting around 1996. I mean, you literally have him almost word-for-word here. That was exactly his reasoning on several decisions that crushed the company. "What matters is keeping customers in the dark long enough for us to ship the product." That really worked out well.
These are all reasons I think Apple will wilt again over the next 3-5 years. Time will tell.
Tell that to the folks who, if they turned around 5 days after the intel announcement, tried to resell their brand new PPC macs on ebay, would have lost over 50% of their money. You Mac fiends are such stupid goons. Your justifications are wonderful but just don't hold water.
How should they have done it? Announced it a long period in advance to allow people to make buy decisions with complete information. Don't just sideswipe people. That's exactly what they did with the 680x0->PPC switch. They did the same thing with the iPod Mini->iPod Nano changeover too. A lot of pissed off customers there.
And before you go on some tangent about how "the products still work and they support them," a product is worth exactly as much as people will pay for it on a widely distributed site like ebay. When my product loses 50% of its value when it should have only lost 20%, that pisses me off, and I think they should pay me for the loss of value.
From your link: "100 units actually reached customers".
So you're saying it's impossible I was one of those 100? I actually just checked it and found that the battery is clearly marked as a "Lithium Ion". So obviously mine didn't get recalled. You're right, it was a 5300, my bad. I'm going to post pix of it online to prove it to you. Course, you'll then just say that I lit it on fire with a lighter just now. So really I can't win. Tell me if you want the pix and I'll post them.
Also, I love your little rsync criticisms of Apple. How about some real criticisms, like abandoning a whole set of customers who bought PPC-based machines right before the changeover. Jerks.
No. I send a call out to an external number using Dial() and want to grab it back after an asynchronous event, like a row being updated in a database. How can you do that, eh Mr. Smarty?
Slashdot Mirror
Because there are other machines on the network accessing the share, and I don't want to export it with SMB and NFS simultaneously because of permissions problems.
Except the share is running on a Linux server.
First of all Windows does have remote administration capabilities. They're not turned on by default. So, I'd figure in a big company that would all be possible. Second, just because Linux has a feature Windows lacks does not excuse having a horrible user interface.
The lack of flash support makes it so I cant use a particular website I must use for work, so, here I am back on Windows. A desktop computer needs to support the major technologies out there. Failing to do so sends people back to Windows.
Basically, my experience confirmed what numerous others have posted in reply to my original post on here. Linux is great for server and development, but not for desktop.
So, I decided to try using it as a desktop product, now that I'm doing more "office" type tasks. Those elements I found very difficult, as described in my original post. Some stuff I figured out, after fooling around with config files. Other things I just couldn't fix. An example is the fact that when you're using OpenOffice Calc and try to save a file to an SMB share, it pops up windows about not being able to save a backup copy of the file. Yes, I checked all the permissions. Yes, I mounted the SMB share both by using Gnome's built-in smb:// interface and just sticking it in fstab. No, I don't have time to go through OOo's source code and fix the bug. I have a job.
Just installing the thing and getting a good set of apps on it took about 8 hours. I followed a guide posted online. It worked well, but that's 8 hours I'll never get back.
I think people are fooling themselves when they say people are just more familiar with Windows. As between Windows and OSX, I can accept that argument, since in my experience OSX works pretty well. Gnome and KDE are a different story. It's not just familiarity. It's the fact that they have serious bugs and problems that affect everyday users and make using them really hard.
To be clear, I *WANT* to use Linux as my desktop. I've used Linux for development purposes since 1995, and I'm a big fan of open source. I'm not trying to start a flamewar; I'm trying to understand how we could have a meaningful alternative to Linux.
That's actually false. It's about 50-50 between Windows and Office. I used to think the same thing until I read through MS's annual report and 10-K one year.
Using Linux was an unmitigated disaster. Things that seem like absolutely basic functionality don't work right. I spent literally 40+ hours poring over online forums trying to figure out how to get pieces of software to work right together. OpenOffice pops up random dialog boxes when you try to save to a file share, Flash doesn't really work right on Linux under Firefox, Evolution doesn't like having its email repository stored on a share, etc, etc.
Then there are the user interface difficulties. Windows and OSX are the only 2 OSes I'm aware of where companies actually have done meaningful user testing to verify what works and what doesn't. Gnome and KDE are nice window managers, but they're just not set up right for office tasks. Sure I can sit around and change everything from the icons' sizes to the taskbar size, but who wants to spend days configuring their computer like that?
And don't even get me started on file associations (what program runs when you double-click on a file with a given extension). No matter what I tried, I couldn't get Gnome to let me change the file associations for files on an SMB share. And, it's absolutely opaque how to change them for regular files too without resorting to editing text files in /usr/share/blahblah.
As for this perceived threat from webapps, I don't think Microsoft should be worried at all. Even the mighty Google knows that trying to reimplement MS Office using Ajax would be an absolute disaster. And, think about it. How would I make my scanner scan files into Word? Does Javascript have an Ajax routine "useScanner()"? How about if I want to fax something to someone?
Personally, I dislike Microsoft's monopolist tactics. But, I have to admit, Windows is a better office OS than Linux (Gnome or KDE), and it's not even close. It's just that simple.
That's not to mention the fact that in golf a fair bit of the skill is in knowing what to do, not just how to do it.
That leaves just the mini-keyboard interface as the big deal in the space. Personally, I'm not all that impressed by that as an input mechanism. But, if people like it, why isn't it copied all over the place? Is the concept of a little QWERTY keyboard seriously patented? Also, what about all those other ideas like having two letters assigned to each keyboard button and then having the phone sort it out based on what it thinks you're probably trying to type? Or something like a chording keyboard (though that would require learning)?
So anyway, what's the big deal with Blackberry in particular. Why is this stuff so hard/interesting/compelling?
Thanks for clarifying that, cowens. I get so tired of these Google fanboys who can't imagine there's anything useful that hasn't already been implemented by AdWords. Obviously, Slashdot didn't love my reasoning on this one, but I think it's pretty clear no one really knows how much clickfraud there is without a controlled study.
Really? How do you create a control group? I'm imagining you might have to literally hire real people to use the net and watch them to see when/if they buy stuff.
The only sure-fire way to detect click fraud in its various forms is to take a look at the click-to-transaction ratio for a given ad. Of course, the only way to really know if there's fraud is to have some way of having a control group. What that would do is let you say something akin to "If someone clicks this particular travel ad, there's an xyz% probability that person will make a purchase, and the average purchase will be $abc."
I don't think there's any company out there doing this kind of controlled experimentation to determine true click-fraud rates, but I believe that's eventually what people will have to do.
Also, there are so many different kinds of intelligence that an IQ test is pretty much meaningless. I've worked with plenty of people who had a very high IQ but were completely ineffective either because of psychological weirdnesses or because they couldn't focus enough to get anything done.
This seems like a great test and demonstration of this kind of technology in a relatively extreme environment. I know several people on SlashDot have argued that the machinery wouldn't be able to handle the kinds of conditions you might confront when needing to rescue someone or in a war. This is exactly the kind of demonstration they need to do to push this kind of project forward.
I know, I know. I'm here all week, folks.
You were right. I was a troll. And, yes, I won. I made up almost everything I said.
Oh and here's the picture I was referring to: Flaming Powerbook.
I've thought for some time that Ajax couldn't/doesn't provide all the answers for how to collaborate on various office documents and workflows. While I think there's a place for stuff like Writely, I really believe that 10 years from now most businesses will still be using MS Office or something like it. So, this acquisition will provide those companies with a realistic way to collaborate aon stuff and increase their per-worker productivity.
There are a whole bunch of benefits from this, including making it more possible for people to telecommute, etc. But to me the best part of this news is that it demonstrates that Microsoft is plowing ahead, in the face of all the FUD and vaporware that's being shot out all over the place about Ajax and web-based technologies. Maybe someday the web will get there, but not soon. Not soon.
I love how you turn around and talk about how if Apple preannounced the changeover it would hurt the company. Well, so what? So, they chose to hurt their customers instead. Good work. You sound just like Gil Amelio when I heard him talk at the Apple annual meeting around 1996. I mean, you literally have him almost word-for-word here. That was exactly his reasoning on several decisions that crushed the company. "What matters is keeping customers in the dark long enough for us to ship the product." That really worked out well.
These are all reasons I think Apple will wilt again over the next 3-5 years. Time will tell.
And, you are a fanboy. No question about it.
Yeah. They have one undocumented function for each square.
How should they have done it? Announced it a long period in advance to allow people to make buy decisions with complete information. Don't just sideswipe people. That's exactly what they did with the 680x0->PPC switch. They did the same thing with the iPod Mini->iPod Nano changeover too. A lot of pissed off customers there.
And before you go on some tangent about how "the products still work and they support them," a product is worth exactly as much as people will pay for it on a widely distributed site like ebay. When my product loses 50% of its value when it should have only lost 20%, that pisses me off, and I think they should pay me for the loss of value.
He's right, it was a 5300 and I'm about to do just that.
So you're saying it's impossible I was one of those 100? I actually just checked it and found that the battery is clearly marked as a "Lithium Ion". So obviously mine didn't get recalled. You're right, it was a 5300, my bad. I'm going to post pix of it online to prove it to you. Course, you'll then just say that I lit it on fire with a lighter just now. So really I can't win. Tell me if you want the pix and I'll post them.
Also, I love your little rsync criticisms of Apple. How about some real criticisms, like abandoning a whole set of customers who bought PPC-based machines right before the changeover. Jerks.
No. I send a call out to an external number using Dial() and want to grab it back after an asynchronous event, like a row being updated in a database. How can you do that, eh Mr. Smarty?