The person couldn't be bothered learning how to use another system after investing a large amount of time in Windows.
The author of the article fairly clearly lays out his problems, word interoperability & multimedia.
They're both 'problems' with linux, although as they're both of a legal or social (rather then technical) challenge, its hard to know what the linux community can do about them.
The question came up when I decided that my six-year-old version of Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating system had to be replaced.
Stupid. Why did it have to be replaced? Hmmmn, I guess his story needed a setup!
Anyway, the review was reasonable - summary: linux is fine if you just want to surf & email, but no good if you need to interoperate with Microsoft Office users (particularly complicated documents) or use a good deal of multimedia.
The second issue is somewhere that the linux community really need to be paying attention to at the moment.
There is no technical problem here, the problem is software patents. Everyone needs to:
1) Attempt to revoke (or prevent coming into existance) patent laws, through writing to your lawmakers / voting / grassroots activism.
2) Write to companies with software patent portfolios that you're going to boycott their products & agitate for your community to do the same.
Multimedia support is a huge gaping hole in the linux desktop - we need non-technical action to fix it (and this is something all the non-programmers who want to help out can do.)
(a) They don't trust that others will donate back to the community, as companies like Apple have, despite being under no legal obligation to do so; or
Nice that you use Apple as an example - you are aware that Apple have closed BSD licensed code in the past aren't you? They're not the only ones to have done so.
More power to them tho' - that's the point of the BSD license, but asserting you should "trust that others will donate back to the community" is nuts.
(b) They want to prevent those who disagree with their software-should-be-free philosophy from benefiting from the use of their code. Particularly due to the seeming spitefulness of the latter
I find that sort of language interesting. Do you find MS or Apple "spiteful" for not allowing others to benefit from the use of Aqua or SQL server's code?
And at any rate - you're incorrect. They allow anyone to use their code - they only place restrictions on distribution of their code.
People who license their code under the GPL, on the other hand, are generally insecure crybabies.
Snort, cute troll.
You write some code, you can either:
1) Let everyone redistribute it, however they see fit (BSD) 2) Let everyone redistribute it, provided they extend the same rights (GPL) 3) Let noone redistribute it or even study it (MS, Apple, etc licenses)
But let's consider a real situation: your house may be a private space and out-of-bounds for cameras, but all exits will be constantly monitored.
Fair enough - I wouldn't like that - but that's not really what we're talking about here. There's a big difference between a democracy putting cameras outside pubs & tube stations and a totalitarian state putting cameras everywhere.
Yes, one can lead to the other, but do have to assume the eventual outcome of any public cameras is going to be a 1984esq totalitarian nightmare?
Re:GuloGulo's back to his old tricks. Big surprise
on
"H-Prize" Announced
·
· Score: 1
Dude!
I was able to destroy his karma in a single encounter (which you so kindly linked to) - surely you should be able to do the same?
Well, I can use my telescope to look through the windows from a distance. So it's OK if I put such telescope to look into your windows and then upload images to a public site?
Apparantly you didn't read my comment: Remember - expectation to privacy and expectation to privacy in a public space are very different things.
I don't think your room is a public space, so I think your expectation to privacy there should be high. My comment was a response to the 'teh 1984' sensationalism of the headline summary. A sensationalism your post echos.
But if I do something stupid and 80,000 people see, then I might be scarred for life. It's just not meant to work that way.
80,000? If you do something that's both stupid & funny - it will spread via email / youtube / etc and be seen by 80 million!
Please note, that I wasn't particularly endorsing this 'public' CCTV (note the "closed" part of that acronymn is getting less accurate all the time) program. Just saying that the comparisons to 1984 are sensationalist.
Oh - and cameras do appear to work to some extent - I don' think US readers are aware of the sort of casual violence that used to surround many English pubs around closing time. The introduction of CCTV really did change that alot.
An Amnesty International report has cited Microsoft among a clutch of leading computer firms heavily criticised for helping to fuel 'a dramatic rise in the number of people detained or sentenced for internet-related offences'.
They just didn't get caught as badly as Yahoo did.
Because you made an asinine assertion. Reading a blog entry does not tell you anything about how someone conducts himself on the job.
Hmmmmn, I would actually assert that reading a blog entry about the blogger's job does tell something about how the blogger conducts himself on the job.
Just like you think Mac users are whiney fan-boys because you come into contact with a lot of them,
I don't think all Mac users are whiney - some (like me!) are - but that vast majority are not.
Ask *anyone* in tech support, in any business. I've asked a few in different businesses and the answer's always the same.
Yes, I am aware of that - I did my hard yards in *shudder* support. However - I don't think its right - as the OP said:
And the guy sucked at it because the most important part of being a good support guy/girl is to be able to get the customer to trust you and let you help themt.
He didn't actually have to interact directly with the guy to know what he's like
Bullshit.
Why do you say Bullshit? Perhaps it's because you didn't finish reading my sentence? Here it is again, with the two words you forgot to qupte bolded for your reading convenience:
He didn't actually have to interact directly with the guy to know what he's like at support
You see:-) - makes more sense now doesn't it - the guy wrote a long essay about his support experiences at AppleCare, so we dp know what he's like at support.
See what a difference two words can make? Hope this has been helpful for you!
and you know this how, exactly? Did he ever take a support incident from you?
He didn't actually have to interact directly with the guy to know what he's like at support - after all the guy wrote a long article describing his experiences. Perhaps after reading the following in TFA:
It's hard enough to have to change your dialect of stupid for every person that calls in,
The GP thought that the guy who wrote the story had a bit of contempt for his customers? I hope that attitude is not typical for Apple Support (but judging by my experience with the "Geniuses" I would say it is).
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't like it - but in most parts of the world that happens now.
Ask any celebrity.
I have yet to encounter anything which Vlc, xine and mplayer cannot play.
Absolutely - same with me.
However, some of the codecs they use are not legal in many jurisdictions around the world. They're difficult for big distros to redistribute.
That's why the guy had troubles.
I believe that the format conversion software (eg transcode) is also extremely capable.
Absolutely, transcode & mencoder (once you learn the command line options) are the best video conversion software out there.
The person couldn't be bothered learning how to use another system after investing a large amount of time in Windows.
The author of the article fairly clearly lays out his problems, word interoperability & multimedia.
They're both 'problems' with linux, although as they're both of a legal or social (rather then technical) challenge, its hard to know what the linux community can do about them.
The question came up when I decided that my six-year-old version of Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating system had to be replaced.
Stupid. Why did it have to be replaced? Hmmmn, I guess his story needed a setup!
Anyway, the review was reasonable - summary: linux is fine if you just want to surf & email, but no good if you need to interoperate with Microsoft Office users (particularly complicated documents) or use a good deal of multimedia.
The second issue is somewhere that the linux community really need to be paying attention to at the moment.
There is no technical problem here, the problem is software patents. Everyone needs to:
1) Attempt to revoke (or prevent coming into existance) patent laws, through writing to your lawmakers / voting / grassroots activism.
2) Write to companies with software patent portfolios that you're going to boycott their products & agitate for your community to do the same.
Multimedia support is a huge gaping hole in the linux desktop - we need non-technical action to fix it (and this is something all the non-programmers who want to help out can do.)
Is this a cunning advertising ploy to get more publicity for your Macbook crusade? If so, it worked on me! :)
Of course not! It's a cunning ploy to direct more ad-revenue-generating traffic to my website
(a) They don't trust that others will donate back to the community, as companies like Apple have, despite being under no legal obligation to do so; or
Nice that you use Apple as an example - you are aware that Apple have closed BSD licensed code in the past aren't you? They're not the only ones to have done so.
More power to them tho' - that's the point of the BSD license, but asserting you should "trust that others will donate back to the community" is nuts.
(b) They want to prevent those who disagree with their software-should-be-free philosophy from benefiting from the use of their code. Particularly due to the seeming spitefulness of the latter
I find that sort of language interesting. Do you find MS or Apple "spiteful" for not allowing others to benefit from the use of Aqua or SQL server's code?
And at any rate - you're incorrect. They allow anyone to use their code - they only place restrictions on distribution of their code.
People who license their code under the GPL, on the other hand, are generally insecure crybabies.
Snort, cute troll.
You write some code, you can either:
1) Let everyone redistribute it, however they see fit (BSD)
2) Let everyone redistribute it, provided they extend the same rights (GPL)
3) Let noone redistribute it or even study it (MS, Apple, etc licenses)
Of these, only the third sounds insecure.
But let's consider a real situation: your house may be a private space and out-of-bounds for cameras, but all exits will be constantly monitored.
Fair enough - I wouldn't like that - but that's not really what we're talking about here. There's a big difference between a democracy putting cameras outside pubs & tube stations and a totalitarian state putting cameras everywhere.
Yes, one can lead to the other, but do have to assume the eventual outcome of any public cameras is going to be a 1984esq totalitarian nightmare?
Dude!
I was able to destroy his karma in a single encounter (which you so kindly linked to) - surely you should be able to do the same?
You're building a straw man argument - what you're talking about has nothing to do with either my comment or the story.
If you know of one pissed up yob who would refrain from fighting just because of a camera up on a mast then please do tell me.
Yup - Ted, from down at the Red Lion.
(surely One isn't enough for you?)
The biggest deterant has been big doormen and LOTS of visible police.
Hmmmmmn, you're right that lots of visible police helped, but frankly big doormen were as much a part of the problem as anything.
I think the police have been helped enormously by CCTV - it backs up their presence with a more realistic threat of conviction.
If I'm in a street, I expect only the people on the street to see me.
That hasn't been the case since video cameras were invented - anyone could legally film you on the street & rebroadcast it as they saw fit.
Don't try to simplify this - mass CCTV coverage is a complicated issue & needs to be discussed as such.
Well, I can use my telescope to look through the windows from a distance. So it's OK if I put such telescope to look into your windows and then upload images to a public site?
Apparantly you didn't read my comment: Remember - expectation to privacy and expectation to privacy in a public space are very different things.
I don't think your room is a public space, so I think your expectation to privacy there should be high. My comment was a response to the 'teh 1984' sensationalism of the headline summary. A sensationalism your post echos.
But if I do something stupid and 80,000 people see, then I might be scarred for life. It's just not meant to work that way.
80,000? If you do something that's both stupid & funny - it will spread via email / youtube / etc and be seen by 80 million!
Please note, that I wasn't particularly endorsing this 'public' CCTV (note the "closed" part of that acronymn is getting less accurate all the time) program. Just saying that the comparisons to 1984 are sensationalist.
Oh - and cameras do appear to work to some extent - I don' think US readers are aware of the sort of casual violence that used to surround many English pubs around closing time. The introduction of CCTV really did change that alot.
And its not 1984 if the government can't see into your private space.
Remember - expectation to privacy and expectation to privacy in a public space are very different things.
love,
:-)
fanboy
Hey! At least you admit it
None of the other fanboys apart from you & me do!
Clippy: I see you're writing something that's critical of a repressive regime. Would you like me to:
( ) Censor your writings prior to ftp upload?
( ) Inform government agents?
( ) Prepare a firing squad?
(*) Do nothing (but fuck up the html)
That is interesting - thanks :-)
I actually saw it in Galeon, but I'm sure its the same thing!
Amnesty International disagrees with you: They just didn't get caught as badly as Yahoo did.
So - feel free to dislike them both.
Thanks for your support! I was thinking I was commenting on the wrong story or something!
Because you made an asinine assertion. Reading a blog entry does not tell you anything about how someone conducts himself on the job.
Hmmmmn, I would actually assert that reading a blog entry about the blogger's job does tell something about how the blogger conducts himself on the job.
Could just be me tho'
I don't think all Mac users are whiney - some (like me!) are - but that vast majority are not.
Ask *anyone* in tech support, in any business. I've asked a few in different businesses and the answer's always the same.
Yes, I am aware of that - I did my hard yards in *shudder* support. However - I don't think its right - as the OP said:And they're quite right.
Why do you say Bullshit? Perhaps it's because you didn't finish reading my sentence? Here it is again, with the two words you forgot to qupte bolded for your reading convenience:You see
See what a difference two words can make? Hope this has been helpful for you!
He didn't actually have to interact directly with the guy to know what he's like at support - after all the guy wrote a long article describing his experiences. Perhaps after reading the following in TFA:The GP thought that the guy who wrote the story had a bit of contempt for his customers? I hope that attitude is not typical for Apple Support (but judging by my experience with the "Geniuses" I would say it is).
As a libertarian, you shouldn't care if someone's selling rat poison as viagra.
The market will sort it all out - the seller will eventual lose sales as his reputations goes downhill. The invisible hand and all that!