head 'em off at the pass
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| grouch May 09, 2006 9:01 AM EDT |
There's a bit of sleight-of-hand going on. >"Essentially, Carmony's position is that, in ten years of holding out, the FOSS community has made relatively few gains, in terms of convincing vendors to release libre codecs and drivers." [...] >"At the Linux Desktop Summit, Carmony asked for a show of hands of those who were not using any proprietary software. He told me that not one single hand went up. All those GNU/Linux users had some amount of non-free software on their systems." [...] >"I can agree with Carmony that the strategy of abstinence seems to have gained us very little so far. " Where is that abstinence? GNU/Linux users are an extremely diverse group. Each chooses his or her own stands and protests to make. In a computing world with a predatory monopoly forcing its influence into many fields, GNU/Linux users adapt. There are many who will use closed, secretive software only where they have no choice. There are many who are vocal in criticising that lack of choice, to the responsible parties. There are few who can avoid all closed, secretive software. Carmony may as well have asked, "How many dogs have ticks or fleas?" GNU/Linux is undergoing a large expansion of usage on the desktop. The influence of its users is increasing. Carmony's policies subvert the potential of that influence, with such statements as, "However, what many may not understand, is that for me to enjoy all of these things, Linspire uses legally licensed, proprietary codecs, drivers and software from third-party companies. Without utilizing this software, Linux is right back where I started five years ago: unusable." (http://www.linspire.com/linspire_letter.php) Linux was not unusable five years ago, even without secret software. Lumping legality, codecs, drivers and third-party software together does not address the problem of closed, secret drivers undermining the efforts of FLOSS developers. Lumping them together does not change the fact that Linspire misinforms potential customers in order to differentiate itself from other distributors for short-term gain. The problem is not the fact that Linspire offers secretive software as a choice to potential customers. The problem is not that Linspire offers licensed secretive software to potential customers. The problems are that Linspire promotes the very software (closed, secretive drivers) that undermines FLOSS developers, does not inform potential customers that such software is subversive to the efforts of FLOSS developers, and misinforms potential customers regarding other distributions and distributors. As GNU/Linux usage grows, it presents a growing opportunity to influence manufacturers to support Linux. Linspire and Carmony seem determined to head off that influence before it has a chance to make a difference, just to maintain a differential between their offerings and others. |
| revhouse1 May 09, 2006 4:54 PM EDT |
"Linux was not unusable five years ago, even without secret software." I guess that would depend on your definition of usable and what it is that you want to use it for doesn't it. 5 years ago I found Linux to be nothing more than a piece of hobby software to play around with but didn't find it all that productive. A lot has changed in 5 years. And whether or not Linspires super secret codecs, softaware and drivers makes it usable still depends on ones definition of usable and what you want to use it for. "The problem is not the fact that Linspire offers secretive software as a choice to potential customers. The problem is not that Linspire offers licensed secretive software to potential customers. The problems are that Linspire promotes the very software (closed, secretive drivers) that undermines FLOSS developers," Well, lets be totally fair here, they promote software the undermines certain portions of the FOSS community -- primarily the one that are having the most difficulty with their projects running -- at least legally that is. cheers The Hamster |
| grouch May 09, 2006 5:16 PM EDT |
>"5 years ago I found Linux to be nothing more than a piece of hobby software to play around with but didn't find it all that productive." Perhaps you, as apparently Mr. Carmony, received some bad information or assistance back then. You see, 2001 was the year Amazon reported saving $17 million in 1 quarter from using that "hobby software" and The Register reported "SuSE 7.3 rocks Red Hat and flips XP the bird" after subjecting SuSE to their "Harry Homemaker" test. Those two reports pretty well cover most of the range of usage of that "hobby software". >"Well, lets be totally fair here, they promote software the undermines certain portions of the FOSS community -- primarily the one that are having the most difficulty with their projects running -- at least legally that is." Yes, let's be totally fair. Linspire is based on Debian GNU/Linux, which is based on the Linux kernel. The Linux kernel developers have criticized the use of closed drivers for hardware. By promoting those closed drivers as a value-add and a differentiator from other distributions, coupled with both explicit and implicit comments that Linux is "unusable" without them, Linspire deliberately subverts the goals of the very developers who make Linspire possible. |
| jimf May 09, 2006 5:53 PM EDT |
>"5 years ago I found Linux to be nothing more than a piece of hobby software to play around with but didn't find it all that productive." I agree. |
| tuxchick2 May 09, 2006 6:48 PM EDT |
Perhaps we need to differentiate between desktop and server Linux. Five years ago I was happily replacing horrid windows servers with nice tuff Linux servers. In fact I started doing that in earnest in 1999. Saving customers bales of money and headaches. The desktop was a different story. It met my needs, but mine are basic- text editing, email, and Web surfing. " By promoting those closed drivers as a value-add and a differentiator from other distributions, coupled with both explicit and implicit comments that Linux is "unusable" without them, Linspire deliberately subverts the goals of the very developers who make Linspire possible." Grouch, that's what bothers me. Well said. |
| grouch May 09, 2006 6:51 PM EDT |
I disagree. 5 years ago, 'Grandma' used Linux. See http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT8221013471.html (there is no date on the article that I can see, but it talks about Mandrake 8.1, released in 2001). 5 years ago, activewin.com, which is focused on Microsoft Windows, reviewed Mandrake 7.2, released in March, 2001. It was a favorable review. http://www.activewin.com/reviews/software/operating-sys/linu... (I see I omitted links in my previous comment. "SuSE 7.3 rocks Red Hat and flips XP the bird" - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/11/16/suse_7_3_rocks_red/ The CNet article regarding Amazon's savings has gone bye-bye in all their reshuffling, but it is referenced by David A. Wheeler in his "Why Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS, FLOSS, or FOSS)? Look at the Numbers!" at http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html) 5 years ago, Linux was 10 and the birthday was noted in mainline press, such as the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1507326.stm Hardly news-worthy for a hobbyist's toy. 5 years ago, the Dept. of Defense adopted StarOffice. While not Linux, StarOffice was one of the significant milestones in convincing many to try GNU/Linux. http://www.linux.org/news/2001/06/25/0006.html 5 years ago, IBM got slapped by the cities of San Francisco, Chicago and Boston for doing sidewalk graffitti in support of "Peace, Love, Linux". Not something the "stodgiest" corporate types are known for doing in support of "hobby software". http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2001/may01/may07/2_tues... (Incidentally, 5 years ago Sam Palmisano delivered his keynote address at LinuxWorld, saying, "With the whole Open Source community and thousands and thousands of the best programmers in the world writing modular and elegant code -- Linux is already as near to a commonly accepted, open industry standard as you can get. IBM spends $5 billion a year on research and development. We can't match this and have an acceptable return for our shareholders." -- http://www.ibm.com/ibm/sjp/01-31-2001.html) 5 years ago, Largo, FL made the news in "Secretaries use Linux, taxpayers save millions" (kinda put the quietus to the old FUD about secretaries and Linux). 'But to Judy, what happens behind the screen doesn't matter. All she knows is that she clicks a program open and uses it for her work, keeping dozens of programs open at a time. She uses Windows at home, but says, "I spend more time on the computer at work than at home, so I guess I'm really more comfortable with this system than with Windows now."' -- http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=01/08/10/1441239 5 years ago, Businessweek reported, 'At a January investment conference, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer declared: "Linux is our enemy No. 1."' Hardly hobby software stuff. "Why Linux Is Giving Microsoft a Migraine" http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/feb2001/nf200102... 5 years ago, Riverdale began the K-12 Linux project. If you look quickly at the bottom of the page at http://www.riverdale.k12.or.us/linux/ before you get redirected, you'll see the date of that page's last update. "[H]obby software" being used by kindergartners through high school. Amazing. (Riverdale's page was one of the first links I placed in http://edge-op.org/grouch/schools.html which was created in 2001. Each time I think it's outlived its usefulness, it gets referenced or mirrored.) Kindergartners, grandmas, MS Windows users, secretaries and corporate IT departments used "hobby software" 5 years ago. |
| dcparris May 09, 2006 6:51 PM EDT |
> 5 years ago I found Linux to be nothing more than a piece of hobby software to play around with but didn't find it all that productive. Sheesh! I had already started promoting GNU/Linux in 2000, and in 2001 was trying to get it into a local church. I had been using Mandrake 8.0, and thought StarOffice was "the bomb". By 2002 I had discovered SUSE 8.0, and began using Windows less and less. I still dual-booted until November 2004 though. |
| NoDough May 09, 2006 6:52 PM EDT |
"5 years ago I found Linux to be nothing more than a piece of hobby software to play around with but didn't find it all that productive." I agree, but with one caveat. I found desktop Linux to be nothing more than a piece of hobby software. Lack of adequate support for Microsoft Office formats and web browsers that had trouble rendering (non-standard) HTML were crippling for me. 5 years ago I had already built several quite successful Linux servers (HTML, SMTP, POP3, IMAP, SSH, VNC, DNS, DHCP, VPN, SQL, SAMBA, SQUID, etc., etc., etc.) Sorry, grouch. But Amazon, Yahoo, and Google aren't examples of desktop Linux. The only example of a 100% conversion to desktop Linux that I know of is Ernie Ball Co. (which, I will grant you, was in 2001.) Even Novell has not completed their desktop conversion yet. OK, so what's my point? My point is that we can't progress toward free/libre software by demanding a fanatical, all-or-nothing approach. It is a process, not an event. Linspire has been working hard to promote Linux and convert non-technical users from other OS camps. I have difficulty seeing that as a bad thing. I also have trouble getting upset at them for making a profit from hard work that benefits the FOSS community. However, unless my information is out of date, they haven't yet made a profit. |
| grouch May 09, 2006 6:53 PM EDT |
tuxchick2: Oops. My long comment above was in reply to the "I agree" comment above yours. I should've quoted. Thanks for your kind words. |
| grouch May 09, 2006 6:54 PM EDT |
>"I agree, but with one caveat. I found desktop Linux to be nothing more than a piece of hobby software." Read the above links and try saying that again. |
| NoDough May 09, 2006 6:56 PM EDT |
I had been using Mandrake 8.0, and thought StarOffice was "the bomb". Sorry, Don. StarOffice was/is not free/libre. |
| grouch May 09, 2006 7:04 PM EDT |
dcparris: >"Sheesh! I had already started promoting GNU/Linux in 2000, and in 2001 was trying to get it into a local church. I had been using Mandrake 8.0, and thought StarOffice was "the bomb". By 2002 I had discovered SUSE 8.0, and began using Windows less and less. I still dual-booted until November 2004 though." Heh. I always thought I was late to the party. My last reason for dual-booting my last computer with MS Windows on it was eliminated by the developers of 'sane' about the end of '99 or early 2000. I think I saw a comment by r_a_trip in one of the threads about being MS-free about the same time. The support of my scanner by the folks of 'sane' also saved my butt. My daughter and I tried for years to get my wife to use a computer, but she refused, based on the aggravation the MS systems gave her at the school where she taught. We finally managed to get her started when I put Linux on a computer just for her. My scanner was attached to that computer and I forgot to boot back to Linux after using it one day. The roof nearly came off the house when she saw "that crap that's just like what I have to deal with every day!" on her computer. She wanted her "nice, simple, stable desktop back, NOW!" I never forgot again and was greatly relieved to have my scanner supported in Linus, later. |
| grouch May 09, 2006 7:05 PM EDT |
>"Sorry, Don. StarOffice was/is not free/libre." StarOffice does not inhibit kernel development. Don using StarOffice does not create a dependency that affects any other user of free software. |
| NoDough May 09, 2006 7:20 PM EDT |
StarOffice does not inhibit kernel development. Don using StarOffice does not create a dependency that affects any other user of free software. From my perspective, this just looks like picking nits to support your position. Unless I'm mistaken, your position is that Linspire is the devil incarnate for selling proprietary software to fill a need that cannot be currently filled with free/libre software. How is this different from using StarOffice, or WordPerfect as in the secretaries story above? What video drivers are running on your Linux systems right now? Have you ever walked into a store and purchased proprietary software? And, for crying out loud, what difference does it make? Using a proprietary video driver, or office suite, or multimedea codec isn't going to drive computer users in droves to adopt Windows. And labelling Linspire Satan isn't going to suddenly cause the 95% of the world running MS to suddenly see the light and dump them. So, why the vindictiveness? The reason people hate discussing politics and religion is that there are so many people in the world that refuse to see and respect the other's perspective. Is that really what we want for Linux? |
| dcparris May 09, 2006 7:27 PM EDT |
>"Sorry, Don. StarOffice was/is not free/libre." I know that now, of course. Back then, all I knew about any of this was that I could afford to run it *legally*. You have to realize, I have struggled financially for years. Yet, here I was, literally a poor man, able to run a full-blown enterprise-class OS and full-featured office suite - all for the cost of a book with a CD, or the $80 boxed set of CDs. StarOffice came with Red Hat 5.1, 2, 7.2, and Mandrake 8.0. By the time I tried SUSE 8.0, it was OpenOffice.org, which had ditched my beloved old StarOffice interface in favor that other, $500 freak-of-nature office suite. Now I'm editing a GNU/Linux news site. Talk about way cool! Most of the problems I've experienced were my own lack of knowledge. The new interfaces took some getting used to, but I found my way around reasonably well. |
| grouch May 09, 2006 7:30 PM EDT |
>"From my perspective, this just looks like picking nits to support your position. Unless I'm mistaken, your position is that Linspire is the devil incarnate for selling proprietary software to fill a need that cannot be currently filled with free/libre software." You're mistaken. I've stated my position repeatedly. Linspire promotes closed drivers. Linspire does not simply offer these drivers. Linspire makes no effort to inform potential customers of any drawbacks to the use of these drivers. On the contrary, Linspire goes out of their way to present these drivers, lumped with "codecs and third-party software" and "legality", as necessary for Linux to be usable. Linspire also gives false information regarding other distributions in its attempt to differentiate itself from them. |
| NoDough May 09, 2006 7:38 PM EDT |
>"I know that now, of course. Back then, all I knew about any of this was that I could afford to run it *legally*. You have to realize..." Don't get me wrong, I'm not attempting to bash (no pun intended) you or StarOffice. I'm mearly making the point that we are in the midst of a long conversion from proprietary, monopolistic software to FOSS. The time will come when we don't need proprietary codecs, just like we no longer need proprietary office suites. In the meantime, it's best not to vilify those who are pushing the world toward FOSS as, I believe, grouch was doing. BTW, great article. |
| dinotrac May 09, 2006 7:44 PM EDT |
>You have to realize, I have struggled financially for years. Yet, here I was, literally a poor man, able to run a full-blown enterprise-class OS and full-featured office suite Rev - I think that is one of the things that people don't understand about free software. I had a similar experience -- dropped out of my career for a midlife crisis trip to law school and brief stint as a lawyer. Grew deep debt. By the time I returned to IT, I was outdated, so started fresh in Unix. Got laid off when one employer went bankrupt, lost a contract when another shrunk mightily and put itself on life support. Way too much time unemployed.... And yet... Was able to put together significant network and even get odd Unix job based on things I could do at home. That experience has convinced me that OSI completely missed the boat when it tried promoting open instead of free. Sure, some folks will want to crack open the code -- but most businesses just want to use the damned stuff. The freedom to mix and match software + hardware to meet the needs of your business as opposed to maximize bang for your licensing buck is a huge business benefit. |
| grouch May 09, 2006 7:46 PM EDT |
Nodough: You've made several mischaracterizations of what I've said. I don't appreciate that. >"[...] your position is that Linspire is the devil incarnate [...]" I never said that. Not any where, nor any time. >"Using a proprietary video driver, or office suite, or multimedea codec isn't going to drive computer users in droves to adopt Windows." I never said it would. Not any where, nor any time. >"And labelling Linspire Satan isn't going to suddenly cause the 95% of the world running MS to suddenly see the light and dump them." I never labelled "Linspire Satan". I never said doing so would cause the effect you describe. Not any where, nor any time. >"So, why the vindictiveness?" What vindictiveness? Where? I assert they are doing wrong and provide what I hope are reasoned arguments in support of that assertion. >"The reason people hate discussing politics and religion is that there are so many people in the world that refuse to see and respect the other's perspective. Is that really what we want for Linux?" I don't see where politics and religion are directly involved in Linspire's promotion of closed drivers, Linspire's claim that Linux was "unusable" 5 years ago, Linspire's claim that Linux would be unusable without closed drivers, or Linspire's misinformation about other distributions (for example, "Installing Linux software is notoriously difficult. Unless you have the technical expertise to install Linux software, other versions of Linux will lock you into the software that came with your initial installation." -- http://www.linspire.com/linspire_faq.php?faq=linspire_diff_l...). |
| NoDough May 09, 2006 8:21 PM EDT |
>"You've made several mischaracterizations of what I've said. I don't appreciate that. I've re-read the thread, and you are correct. My hyperbole greatly exceeds yours. I apologize. Let me take this opportunity to point out my objections. The general tone of your comments have painted Linspire as a dishonest, predatory company. To wit: >"There's a bit of sleight-of-hand going on." >'Carmony may as well have asked, "How many dogs have ticks or fleas?"' >"...Linspire misinforms potential customers in order to differentiate itself from other distributors for short-term gain." >"Linspire and Carmony seem determined to head off that influence before it has a chance to make a difference, just to maintain a differential between their offerings and others." >"...Linspire deliberately subverts the goals of the very developers who make Linspire possible." >"StarOffice does not inhibit kernel development." [necessarilly inferring that Linspire does] I disagree with all of the above and I haven't seen anything to support those conclusions. Having a different perspective and/or opinion does not make someone dishonest. You have a right to your opinion, I to mine, and Carmony to his. To call someone "wrong" without an attempt to appreciate their position is akin to the "religion and politics" sentiment from my previous post. I would much prefer that we discussed facts and frustrations without immediately labelling the opposing party dishonest. |
| grouch May 09, 2006 9:24 PM EDT |
Nodough: >"I disagree with all of the above and I haven't seen anything to support those conclusions. Having a different perspective and/or opinion does not make someone dishonest. You have a right to your opinion, I to mine, and Carmony to his." Fair enough. >"There's a bit of sleight-of-hand going on." The article states, "Essentially, Carmony's position is that, in ten years of holding out, the FOSS community has made relatively few gains, in terms of convincing vendors to release libre codecs and drivers." To illustrate this, he asks for a show of hands of those who "were not using proprietary software". Using "some amount" of "proprietary" software does not support the claim made. There is no attempt to define "relatively few gains". There is no differentiation of "proprietary" software which affects only a particular user and that which leads to the "erosion" that Arjan van de Ven and Andrea Arcangeli wrote about at http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0512.0/0972.ht... and http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0512.0/1282.ht... respectively. Lumping all "proprietary" software into one bag is about as confusing as lumping copyright, trademarks and patents into the 'Intellectual Property' bag. Some disrupt development affecting all users and some place only the particular user at risk. Asking the question in that manner is deceptive due to its generality. How many hands do you think would have gone up if he had asked, "How many of you have free software on your computers?" It is as legitimate as the question posed. It would not be an indicator of the success or failure of free software, just as the question he asked is not an indicator of the success or failure of FOSS to get vendors to open up. Hence, my statement that '"Carmony may as well have asked, "How many dogs have ticks or fleas?"' >"Linspire and Carmony seem determined to head off that influence before it has a chance to make a difference, just to maintain a differential between their offerings and others." From the "Linspire Letter" -- "However, what many may not understand, is that for me to enjoy all of these things, Linspire uses legally licensed, proprietary codecs, drivers and software from third-party companies. Without utilizing this software, Linux is right back where I started five years ago: unusable." It is demonstrably not "unusable" without that software. Lumping all of those together creates the impression that each is necessary to keep Linux from being "unusable". From the same source -- "I know there will be some who will abhor the idea of offering proprietary software to be used next to open source, but I honestly believe it's time to take a realistic approach. The world just isn't going to throw away their millions of iPods, or stop watching DVDs. Until viable alternatives emerge, Linux needs to offer a total, usable experience. Freespire doesn't force any proprietary code on anyone, it simply gives them that choice as an option." Note that iPods and DVDs are listed, neither of which rely on binary kernel drivers. Note "usable experience". The implication is that without the "proprietary code", there is no "total, usable experience". The implication is that no other distribution is usable, also. News reports show considerable evidence of other distributions being used by many millions of people. Linspire's U.S. license for DVDs should be sufficient differentiation without misinforming about "total, usable experience" regarding other distributions. In an earlier comment, I quoted Linspire's FAQ regarding the difficulty of installation of software on other distributions and "lock[ing] you into the software that came with your initial installation.". Neither is the norm for most of the major distributions. I've never heard of any distribution with lock-in. As uptake of GNU/Linux increases, the influence of its informed users with respect to hardware manufacturers increases. Linspire's "letter" of April 24, 2006 appears aimed at selling the idea that Linux is "unusable" without "proprietary software". Linspire makes considerable effort to sell this idea as a difference between their distribution and others. Linspire makes no effort that I can find to inform users of the hazards of closed drivers. With considerable effort on one side of the equation, and none on the other, I came to the conclusion stated and quoted above. >"...Linspire deliberately subverts the goals of the very developers who make Linspire possible." Linspire presents the information in their "Letter" and their "FAQ". It seems unmistakeable, to me, that the information presented there is deliberate. From the stated objections of kernel developers to binary kernel modules, and the implications of dependence on those binary modules that they have stated, and the evidence that I have given regarding Linspire's promotion of binary drivers, including lumping them with other closed software in their sales pitches where the effect is confusion and misinformation, I made the above conclusion. >"StarOffice does not inhibit kernel development." [necessarilly inferring that Linspire does] Linspire promotes closed drivers. Dependency on closed drivers has a detrimental effect on kernel development as bugs are submitted that are unfixable. StarOffice does not concern the kernel. Even if a user chose the ancient version of StarOffice, it would affect only that user. Users relying upon closed drivers (binary kernel modules) without understanding the effect of that reliance, are unlikely to attempt to find hardware which does not rely on those drivers. Their uninformed choice affects the kernel and therefore affects all users of the kernel. I hope I've made my arguments clear, whether you continue to disagree with my conclusions or not. |
| grouch May 09, 2006 10:11 PM EDT |
A follow-up, to add a reference: From "Kernel Summit 2005: The hardware vendors' panel" by Jonathan Corbet, http://lwn.net/Articles/144269/ "The next speaker was Andrew Vasquez from QLogic. His brief talk went over some of the hassles he has had to deal with. At the top of the list was firmware blobs. They create big patches and have GPL issues. Interestingly, he said that the firmware issues, along with pressure from "a major distribution," are motivating the company to move its firmware back into the device. If the driver does not have to load firmware to make the device function, these issues go away. Since, as he put it, "a double-digit percentage" of QLogic's sales are for Linux systems, providing good support (and keeping the community happy) matters to the company." Please notice 'pressure from "a major distribution"' and the sales the QLogic representative notes. Going back further in time, Jerry Cooperstein wrote, in "Vanishing Features of the 2.6 Kernel", 2002 (http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2002/12/12/vanishi...): "Reminding the purveyors of binary modules that they continue to operate at the pleasure of the Linux kernel developers and their open-source licenses is seen to be a necessary (even enjoyable) task. It has probably always been true that the only way to protect investment in Linux deployment of drivers and other kernel facilities (not applications) is to go open source, even if that is difficult for commercial enterprises to absorb. " Note the distinction between drivers and applications. Note the implied distaste of binary modules by kernel developers. Fast-forward to April, 2006, "New Linux look fuels old debate" by Stephen Shankland http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/New_Linux_look_fue... 'A proprietary driver, even if it works, raises complications. "If you have an open-source kernel...and you add a binary module into the mix, it reduces your ability to provide the customer the same level of service," said Dirk Hohndel, Intel's director of Linux and open-source strategy.' 'On the flip side, Intel believes it can use open-source drivers to gain against Nvidia and ATI. The strategy parallels the chipmaker's earlier move with wireless networking support, and it has won an ally in Red Hat. "Their partnering with the open-source community is a pretty strong advantage," Stevens said.' Pressure, competition, informed users. What is true today can be altered for tomorrow IF users are informed about what is in their best interests. |
| NoDough May 10, 2006 5:23 AM EDT |
Grouch,
You and I agree concerning the ultimate goal. In fact, I agree with your last post 100%. What we disagree about is what methods are necessary to arrive at the goal. Both of us would love to see open source codecs, drivers, etc. used exclusively from today forward. But the realities are that this type of change will take time. It's difficult to stand on the 100th floor of a building when only the first 50 have been built. I believe that Linspire is helping the FOSS community build by giving non-technical users a fully functional Linux desktop today and by sponsoring projects that are 100% FOSS (nvu, lsongs, lphoto, kde, firefox, gaim, kopete, etc.) Note that they make contributions to these projects while not yet having seen a profit themselves. Notably, you and I are not Linspire's audience. Their target market is users who don't really know anything about computers and software and are blissful in their ignorance. For this group, a computer that won't display web video, play CDs and DVDs, or use their computer's hardware is "unusable." These same users are, as a practical matter, locked into the software that came with their distribution. Why? Because they don't know how to change it and are unwilling to learn. In short, they just want it to work. I would love to respond at greater length, but duty calls. Have a great day. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 7:15 AM EDT |
>"What we disagree about is what methods are necessary to arrive at the goal. Both of us would love to see open source codecs, drivers, etc. used exclusively from today forward. But the realities are that this type of change will take time. It's difficult to stand on the 100th floor of a building when only the first 50 have been built." For reasons outlined previously, I think Linspire's methods are wrong. I object to their misinformation, whether it is explicit, implied or by omission, just as I object to the misinformation spread by Microsoft. >"Notably, you and I are not Linspire's audience. Their target market is users who don't really know anything about computers and software and are blissful in their ignorance." They do not have to remain ignorant. They should not be misinformed to keep them ignorant. If they choose to remain ignorant, even if Linspire decided to provide correct information, that would not be Linspire's failing. Since Linspire actively misinforms, it is Linspire's failing. >"These same users are, as a practical matter, locked into the software that came with their distribution. Why? Because they don't know how to change it and are unwilling to learn. In short, they just want it to work." Every major distribution now provides for simple, clicky installation of incredible amounts of software. Linspire does not need to pretend GNU/Linux distributions and distributors stagnated 5 years ago in order to sell their CNR service. Lots of 'Live CD' distros just work. Linspire providing the ability to purchase computers with their distribution preinstalled, from retail outlets, is a good thing. Linspire providing a distribution with a U.S. license for DVD playback may be a good thing. Linspire promoting itself as being usable "out of the box" is a good thing. Linspire promoting itself with differences created in marketing documents rather than existing in fact is a bad thing. Linspire promoting closed drivers as necessary to avoid Linux being "unusable" is a bad thing. Linspire making no effort, after promoting closed drivers, to explain the impact of closed drivers on the open development of Linux is a bad thing. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 7:49 AM EDT |
A P.S.: I really appreciate DC Parris taking the time and trouble to contact Kevin Carmony for his response, and producing a fine, thoughtful article from that contact. I apologize for failing to acknowledge his good work in opening communications, before jumping into this thread. |
| tuxchick2 May 10, 2006 7:49 AM EDT |
OK, this is kind of rambling, but finally my thoughts are crystallizing. Or fossilizing, maybe. " Their target market is users who don't really know anything about computers and software and are blissful in their ignorance. For this group, a computer that won't display web video, play CDs and DVDs, or use their computer's hardware is "unusable." These same users are, as a practical matter, locked into the software that came with their distribution. Why? Because they don't know how to change it and are unwilling to learn. In short, they just want it to work." NoDough, you are correct. It's this very ignorance that has gotten so many computer users trapped in shoddy, overpriced, malware-friendly, incompatible software. And victimized the rest of us by turning the Internet into a cesspool, and reducing our choices to nearly nothing. If it weren't for FOSS what choices would we have? "Would you like a side of DRM with your Vista today? Haha, just kidding, you're getting it anyway." How does catering to these users by caving in to proprietary closed-source help anything? That's like taking up smoking to lose weight. It's naive to think that Linspire's wholehearted embrace of closed-source apps and drivers is somehow magically going to transform into mass love for FOSS. (Incidentally, how much pain must users suffer before they are willing to consider alternatives? Apparently infinite.) Let's remember why a computer might not play CDs/DVDs or Web video, or not read certain file formats, or why certain hardware might not work with it. It has nothing to do with market share, but everything to do with propping up an illegal, abusive monopoly by any means, legal or illegal. Ordinary market forces don't work- it takes stubborn, uncompromising effort to get vendors to support FOSS, because Microsoft applies enormous pressures to keep vendors, partners, and customers firmly in line. It's naive to think that vendors will somehow magically see the light and recognize that FOSS users represent a sizable market share, and that it's in their interests to support as wide a variety of platforms as possible. Linux long ago surpassed Apple in market share, yet both are still treated as toxic stepchildren. Why? Because it has nothing to do with market share, and everything to do with fear of Microsoft. Linspire's goal of achieving greater market share will only achieve that- greater market share. I doubt that it will translate into wider vendor FOSS support. Perhaps you've noticed how there is much greater FOSS acceptance overseas than in the US, and how even big tuff companies like Intel have to go overseas to market FOSS-friendly devices. Interestingly, Apple is getting more attention these days, and that's because it is a closed platform. The DRM-DMCA hoodlums are never going to embrace FOSS because they cannot control it, and in fact are already trying to undermine it. So Apple looks good to them, but not that commie hippie liberal Linux. |
| r_a_trip May 10, 2006 7:54 AM EDT |
I believe that Linspire is helping the FOSS community build by giving non-technical users a fully functional Linux desktop today and by sponsoring projects that are 100% FOSS (nvu, lsongs, lphoto, kde, firefox, gaim, kopete, etc.) Note that they make contributions to these projects while not yet having seen a profit themselves. Briefly chipping in. The problem is not that Linspire includes proprietary technology. The problem is (two-fold) that Linsire promotes proprietary software as a necessary and inevitable building block and that their potential users don't use Linspire for the inherant Freedom of coercion in Free Software, but use it to flee Microsoft and to get a cheaper deal. In the old days (say 1997, 1998) you first got a platter full of ideology and then you got a little bowl of Free Software. In those days you knew what you were getting into. You knew Free Software was around for the sake of Freedom, not convenience. Nowadays you get a large platter of Free Software (with the mislabeling of Open Source) and at the end you get a cup of barely warmed over idealism, which most people forget the moment they were presented with it. Inviting people in willy nilly, without making sure the core tenet of Freedom (that made Free Software possible in the first place) survives, is asking to be destroyed from the inside out. Everybody who uses Free Software for completely selfish reasons, with no respect for the reason d'etre of Free Software, is a liability. It is a force that will weaken Free Software at its core to the point of total proprietization. Just look at the BSD's. They are succesful, but they are small because they don't actively promote sharing (read forcing) and as a result are far more often pillaged for their code than receiving contributions. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 9:14 AM EDT |
Beautiful! Now if we could just get the above 2 comments by tuxchick2 and r_a_trip put into bold, 24 pt type and plastered on the front page, maybe there would be fewer cries of "zealot" and "purity" and overruling user choice. |
| dinotrac May 10, 2006 11:27 AM EDT |
grouch -- Only when there are fewer zealots crying for purity over user choice. And you know that. This thread has been quite civil. Even the "zealot" position is far more reasonable than a /. flamefest. Even so, posters have felt a need to cast moral aspersions (selfish, lazy, unwilling to learn) on people who do not share their priorities. Let's be honest here: All of this angst is aimed at the people behind a Linux distribution!! Not just that, but people who do not violate licenses and who contribute to free software. The crime? Doing what most everybody else does, but being very upfront about it. This reminds me of 60s prudes confronted with the birth-control pill and its aftermath. Not only did "good girls" do it, they weren't afraid to say so. Sure. I'd like to see more sincere emphasis on the free software, and pressure on folks like nVidia and ATI. I wish everything were free, but I don't need Linux to be an exclusive club. Quite the opposite. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 11:42 AM EDT |
dinotrac: >"The crime? Doing what most everybody else does, but being very upfront about it." No. Show me where Red Hat, who has received much malignment in the past as the "MS of Linux", promotes closed drivers. Show me where SUSE claims that Linux is unusable without closed drivers. Show me where Mandriva claims other distributions will "lock you in". Now, if your "everybody else" includes distributions that do not have corporate backers for their support services, plug any of their names into the above challenge. |
| dinotrac May 10, 2006 1:14 PM EDT |
grouch - Sorry. I'm not buying the whine. Split all the hairs you want, you're getting upset about the sizzle, not the steak. Whatever happened to actions count more than words? |
| dcparris May 10, 2006 2:34 PM EDT |
> Not only did "good girls" do it, they weren't afraid to say so. And people of various backgrounds still consider both of those activities appalling today. The problem, though, is that your comparison seems backwards to me - especially given that the non-free proponents and users are the prudes who refuse to share the love - um, er, I mean the software. :-) I know what you mean, but I somehow it doesn't seem like too many people went back to being prudes. "Yeah man, prudish is cool!" Sorry, I just couldn't resist the temptation. |
| tuxchick2 May 10, 2006 2:53 PM EDT |
hahahahaaaa, last word! I dispense headlocks and ear bites!! I win I win I win!! |
| grouch May 10, 2006 4:29 PM EDT |
dinotrac: >"Whatever happened to actions count more than words?" It appears you haven't read anything I've quoted from Linspire, nor anything I've linked from Linspire. Pointing out their dishonesty is not splitting hairs, IMO. |
| dcparris May 10, 2006 5:47 PM EDT |
> Pointing out their dishonesty is not splitting hairs, IMO. He's kinda gotta point there, Dino. |
| dinotrac May 10, 2006 5:53 PM EDT |
dcparris & grouch: One man's dishonesty is another's difference of view is yet another's sales puffery. I have no problem with taking the Linspire folks to task for a little bit of hypocrisy. I have no problem wishing they would be a little more out front on the free part of free software, and calling them on their failure to do so. That's all fine. So mych antipathy towards Linspire. It's hard for me to fathom. There are so many more deserving targets. It boggles my mind. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 6:33 PM EDT |
dinotrac: Don't think for a minute that I can't see through your evil, nefarious plot to make tuxchick2's "last word", not. You're just not ~that~ devious. Please also note that in this thread and the other long, controversial one, most of the verbiage was spent in dispelling accusations not made (evil, satan, zealots controlling users, purists trying to dictate closed "apps", etc.), and repeating: 1. promotion of closed drivers ("promotion" being advocating as necessary and indispensible, as well as the (really offensive) claim that Linux would be unusable without them) 2. no attempt whatsoever to even mention the detrimental effects of closed drivers on the foundation of Linspire 3. dispensing false information about other distributions as a differentiating factor 4. coalescing closed drivers, closed codecs, closed third-party applications and legalities in the promotion, even though each of those has different effects on the efforts of free software developers (only promoting closed drivers affects all users; the legal DVD license affects only U.S. users Most of the antipathy seemed to come in reaction, from my point of view. PJ's original article pulled no punches, I admit, but then she's been neck-deep in SCOundrel attacks for 3 years running. I'm pretty sure that would sensitize anyone to anything resembling tactics she's seen. Dispensing with the hyperventilated, contrived arguments following each of PJ's, Carla's, and Don's articles (I haven't seen any surrounding Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols article) leaves arguments against Linspire's hypocrisy, as you noted, plus their false information regarding other distros. Countering these are considered arguments that Linspire's grab for market share is inconsequential and short-lived in the overall progression of Linux and that the customers they target are unlikely to ever put up a fuss against hardware makers, anyway. (The latter is fairly offensive to me, having once been completely ignorant of free software but having never been a mindless, unteachable, robot-like "consumer"). |
| sbergman27 May 10, 2006 7:00 PM EDT |
> So much antipathy towards Linspire. It's hard for me to fathom. There are so many more deserving targets. It boggles my mind. Linspire is a heretic. They are impure. They are not of the body and will be absorbed or destroyed (in the name of Freedom, of course). And they are promoting a view that is much easier for the general population to understand than the hair-splitting we hold so dear here in "The Community" (whatever that is). |
| grouch May 10, 2006 7:41 PM EDT |
sbergman27: Kinda looks like you skipped a whole lot to jump down here and begin spouting about religion. |
| sbergman27 May 10, 2006 7:50 PM EDT |
I'm not spouting about religion. I'm observing that a lot of newbies are *spouting off* their new found religion. This thread has not stopped being about religion. This site has not stopped being about religion. Though it has gotten better recently. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 8:04 PM EDT |
sbergman27: Show me. *You* made the statements about "heretic" and "impure", both with religious connotations. Such contrived, pseudo-religious accusations have been spewed in each of the discussions following PJ's article, Carla's article and Don's article. I can't find any such trolling, discussion distorting non-arguments put forth by anyone who has argued that Linspire has performed specific acts the debaters consider harmful to the goals of free and open software. Religion is more personal that a toothbrush, and what you do with yours in the privacy of your own home is none of my business. If you want to discuss religion, I'm not interested. I prefer public discussions of facts and people's reasoned conclusions based on those facts. Do you have any *facts* not covered in any of the articles or discussions thus far, or do you have only the same, tired, worn-out insinuations and innuendo covered ad nauseum already? |
| sbergman27 May 10, 2006 8:12 PM EDT |
> I prefer public discussions of facts and people's reasoned conclusions based on those facts. Great. We agree. Now, whose facts are we talking about? -Steve P.S. Why do you require so many words to say so little? |
| grouch May 10, 2006 8:38 PM EDT |
sbergman27: >"Great. We agree. Now, whose facts are we talking about?" See references linked throughout this thread, with quotes, and references linked throughout the thread following Carla's article, with quotes. P.S. I gave references, quotes, and arguments based upon those. You gave slurs, giving no basis for them. References take more work and words. |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 6:26 AM EDT |
Well, the "facts" that I have seen here have more of less convinced me to buy a box for evaluation. It looks like the best distro for the people I convert from Windows. It gives them what they are going to be asking me for anyway without the hassle. Video codecs, their wi-fi working (like it does on Windows) etc. That's $49 for the box and $99/year for a distro that *knows * about the proprietary stuff and keeps it working so I don't have to. For 27 cents a day, that's not a bad deal. OK. Someone is going to say I'm giving up my freedom or giving up someone else's freedom on their behalf. Bullhonky. (Sorry, there is just no other word that covers it. DC Parris, you have my explicit permission to edit it however you see fit, of course.) I'm paying 27 cents a day to be rid of some of the hassle of being the sole maintainer of an OS that no one else knows how to support. When one gives a Windows box to a friend of family member, it is always assumed that there is a "kid down the street" that "knows about computers". I know of 2 other people in Oklahoma City who can support Linux. There are more, of course. I just don't know them. And I can't ask them to support Aunt Martha. |
| dcparris May 11, 2006 6:40 AM EDT |
> OK. Someone is going to say I'm giving up my freedom or giving up someone else's freedom on their behalf. Bullshit. (Sorry, there is just no other word that covers it. DC Parris, you have my explicit permission to edit it however you see fit, of course.) Try "Bullhonky". :-) Alternativley, try dictionary.com. I believe they offer a thesaurus to boot. >I'm paying 27 cents a day to be rid of some of the hassle of being the sole maintainer of an OS that no one else knows how to support. When one gives a Windows box to a friend of family member, it is always assumed that there is a "kid down the street" that "knows about computers". I know of 2 other people in Oklahoma City who can support Linux. There are more, of course. I just don't know them. And I can't ask them to support Aunt Martha. I could introduce you to a third. At least, I believe he's in OK City. :-) An he's a big BSD fan who writes beginner's tutorials for BSD/GNU systems. |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 6:48 AM EDT |
"Bullhonky" works just fine. :-) Already edited appropriately. We're now profanity free. But I fear I've introduced a racial slur(?). Such is life in an imperfect world. Aunt Martha could live with BSD. Do you think she'd like him? |
| tuxchick2 May 11, 2006 6:51 AM EDT |
The insults were unnecessary. I'm tired of folks whining about 'religious zealots'. It's a cheap shot. Either make a case for your viewpoint, or have a nice big cup of STFU. Anyone who has actually been paying attention knows that the debate is about Linspire's actions, not users. |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 7:05 AM EDT |
The thing about it is that when you cut though all the gratuitous dialogue, it's true. We (whoever "we" is) have a lot of religious zealots these days. (Many of them wet behind the ears, but that's another thread.) Requiring an essay in order to be taken seriously is just an effort to raise the barrier to entry. Makes it harder to counter some of the weird things that are said here that would never fly otherwise. On LXer, pro Free Software is more or less a monopoly. And naturally, adherents use monopoly tactics. I simply find it distasteful. |
| tuxchick2 May 11, 2006 7:53 AM EDT |
Oh come on! Gratuitious dialogue? An inability to listen, think, and engage in an actual discussion is a pretty poor excuse to insult people who say what you don't want to hear. Was that short enough for you? |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 7:59 AM EDT |
Yes, I know. I'm not of the body. I'm not going to be absorbed. So I guess I'll have to be destroyed. And yes, that was short enough for my limited brain to comprehend. :-) |
| grouch May 11, 2006 9:06 AM EDT |
sbergman27: >"Someone is going to say I'm giving up my freedom or giving up someone else's freedom on their behalf. " sbergman27, meet vinea. http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/22508/ Really strange. I've looked back over this thread and the one linked above and there seems to be an emotional, knee-jerk reaction from people whose main point appears to be to denigrate anyone who dares to criticize Linspire. The typical reaction of this type is to rail and rant against the people, rather than the facts or their message or their conclusions. Tracking the thread linked above, we have: * my opening comment responding to Carla's article and giving reasons why I think the conclusions in the article are wrong, * randyennis questioning the basis of my objections, giving reasons why he/she thinks the practicality of Linspire's offerings for their target customers and their support of FOSS software outweigh negative effects * my response to randyennis, talking about the erosion effect * tuxchick2's response to me * jdixon's response to my comment, pointing out that Linspire does not violate the GPL and arguing that customers won by Linspire's offerings can move to a "more open distribution" * dinotrac indicating displeasure about "(some) GPL supporters" * my response to dinotrac pointing out it is not GPL-specific * dinotrac calling for "concrete" instead of "philosophizing" * jdixon contrasting the target market of Linspire with typical Linux users * dinotrac giving an example of an experienced Linux user praising Linspire * jdixon pointing out that newbies need such drivers preinstalled * dinotrac agreeing with jdixon's point * dcparris being funny * my response to dinotrac's call for "concrete" * jdixon speculating that Linspire might alienate the very customers they seek if they warned about closed drivers * jimf agreeing with jdixon * tuxchick2 indicating a change of mind, with reasons * my response to tuxchick2 * dinotrac's response to me * my response to dinotrac * richo123 appreciative of tuxchick2's "intellectual honesty" and noting pragmatism vs. idealism * me admitting bad taste in thread title * tuxchick2's response * my response * vinea brings the first comment with "zealot", "purists", flash, mp3s, DVDs. [followed by long thread of repeats] This thread is similar, except Nodough brought in "fanatical" early, started to head down the vinea path, then changed course and gave reasons for disagreeing with the message rather than the messenger. Nodough didn't change my mind and I don't think I changed Nodough's mind, but the discussion remained on the message after a brief vinea-like diversion. The ones objecting to criticism of Linspire seem most willing to attack the messenger with epithets laden with religious connotations while ignoring any facts or conclusions within the message. |
| dinotrac May 11, 2006 9:24 AM EDT |
Steve, Steve, Steve -- >On LXer, pro Free Software is more or less a monopoly. And naturally, adherents use monopoly tactics. Seriously? I might have agreed with you at one point, but that's not the case now. Pro Free Software monopoly? Well...sure. This is a Linux site. What do you expect? Monopoly tactics? Not remotely. If that were the case, your posts wouldn't show up, or would be edited in ways you don't like, etc. Not everyone is gifted in the art of persuasive writing. It's a hard thing to do. Same for clear and concise writing. Most people who get good at that have spent years being brutalized by the Editor from Hell. The mark of a democracy -- or a forum with democratic aspirations -- is that expression is not limited to a few "professionals". People express themselves well or they do not. They let their passion get the better of their reason or they do not. It's the nature of the beast. As a result, posts will be all over the place. And -- you can't escape your share of responsibility. Somebody does the equivalent of FACT: The Sky is blue...etc...FACT:Conservatives all kill small children and nail their heads to the wall, and then complains when you don't rebut each point... Stevie, baby: YOU CAN IGNORE THE DEMAND!!! I do it all the time and never lose sleep. And here's something you should like: It really ticks them off!! You can make your life easier and more fun at the same time. Seriously. Make your points. The original poster may try to set the ground rules. You don't have to let that happen. Likely as not, the original poster won't give you a serious listen anyway. What do you care? Other people are reading the posts. If you are making better points, you will sway them. If the original poster is a ranting fool, others will see that. Above all -- don't let it get under your skin. This should be an enjoyable experience and you have the power to make that happen for you. |
| dcparris May 11, 2006 10:01 AM EDT |
> Above all -- don't let it get under your skin. This should be an enjoyable experience and you have the power to make that happen for you. In my experience, participating in the LXer forums has been an enjoyable experience. It's true that we don't always agree with each other, but we generally keep it clean. ;-) That said, most discussions here tend to focus on facts and not personalities, which may be why we have the folks we do have. My $0.63 worth (accounting for inflation) |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 11:12 AM EDT |
> I might have agreed with you at one point, but that's not the case now. I should address this first. I am not referring to the bad old days when posting something that the editor didn't like got your post deleted. It violated the "Terms of Use" or some such. DC has done a great job and I commend him. > And here's something you should like: It really ticks them off!! I think Dean just called me a troll. ;-) - My real worry about the site, currently, and Linux sites in general, is that now that we have achieved a very small degree of success, people are huddling together in their isolated Linux enclaves acting like Linux already has achieved World Domination. We haven't. Huddling together and acting like we have doesn't change that. In reality, we still need a distro like Linspire. More and more, I think that Aunt Martha is gonna get Linspire on the next go round. |
| dinotrac May 11, 2006 11:18 AM EDT |
>More and more, I think that Aunt Martha is gonna get Linspire on the next go round. Sure beats arthritis, incontinence, osteoporosis and lots of other things she could get...like Windows. |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 11:32 AM EDT |
> Sure beats arthritis, incontinence, osteoporosis and lots of other things she could get...like Windows. I'm forwarding this to the American Incontinence Association. Where, I'm sure, they'll huddle in their circle for a bit and send you some choice replies regarding your comparing Incontinence with arthritis and osteoporosis. For that matter, I am ALSO forwarding this to the American Aunt's association to get their input on the association of "Aunts" with "Old". So there. ;-) -Steve |
| tuxchick2 May 11, 2006 11:34 AM EDT |
You say "incontinence" like it's a bad thing. |
| jimf May 11, 2006 11:35 AM EDT |
Quoting:In reality, we still need a distro like Linspire. Sbergman, I have to agree with this. Despite the purist rhetoric (oh tuxchick and grouch are gonna hammer me on that one) to the contrary, I doubt that there will be a devastating effect to mixing proprietary and FOSS 'as long as' Foss continues to develop its own solutions. Is it the Ideal ethical solution? Absolutely not! But, the real world isn't generally very ethical (in case you hadn't noticed). We all have to deal with that world while we are trying to educate and change it. Telling people that they should do without, or just use their fingernails when they need a tool is just plain stupid, and, no solution at all. |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 11:38 AM EDT |
> You say "incontinence" like it's a bad thing. Isn't that what freedom and Open Source are about? Do it anywhere you want? I don't see a problem... |
| dinotrac May 11, 2006 11:40 AM EDT |
>Do it anywhere you want? I don't see a problem... That's why I like LXer -- always a running dialog. |
| grouch May 11, 2006 11:58 AM EDT |
jimf: >"I have to agree with this. Despite the purist rhetoric (oh tuxchick and grouch are gonna hammer me on that one) to the contrary, I doubt that there will be a devastating effect to mixing proprietary and FOSS 'as long as' Foss continues to develop its own solutions. Is it the Ideal ethical solution? Absolutely not!" Except for that phrase "purist rhetoric", then, I've found your arguments reasonable. I don't agree with you in dismissing Linspire's promotional efforts, but I don't recall your dismissal being based on preconceived notions of the mindset of anyone arguing against Linspire's promotions. Unless my memory is playing tricks on me, you agreed with jdixon's assessment that users in Linspire's target market could be alienated by warnings about closed drivers and you said that there is a need for a distro like Linspire. I haven't argued for Linspire to change their distribution and don't recall anyone else doing so. Linspire's misinformation is what is harmful. >"Telling people that they should do without, or just use their fingernails when they need a tool is just plain stupid, and, no solution at all." Huh? |
| dcparris May 11, 2006 12:04 PM EDT |
>> More and more, I think that Aunt Martha is gonna get Linspire on the next go round. > Sure beats arthritis, incontinence, osteoporosis and lots of other things she could get...like Windows. I'll admit that _anything_ beats Windows. I wouldn't give that to Osama bin Laden. Well, I might dream about doing that to him, but alas, I'm just not sure I could be so cruel. The years have softened my heart so. Give Aunt Martha one of those bead boards (forget what you call them), attach a cable from it to the cable modem, and tell her it's a computer. Whatever you do, don't give her Windows. I would honestly rather you got her NeverFreeSpire instead of Windows. That said, I agree with the viewpoint of grouch and Tuxchick. Still, it's a free country. :-) |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 12:04 PM EDT |
>>"Telling people that they should do without, or just use their fingernails when they need a tool is just plain stupid, and, no solution at all." > Huh? How many people do you support who use Linux? And how many do you support without pay? |
| NoDough May 11, 2006 1:05 PM EDT |
>"Give Aunt Martha one of those bead boards (forget what you call them), attach a cable from it to the cable modem, and tell her it's a computer." I believe they were called "Lite Brites". [edit] Better yet, give her a computer running Linux and point the home page here. http://www.sfpg.com/animation/liteBrite.html# [/edit] |
| jimf May 11, 2006 1:31 PM EDT |
grouch said:
Quoting:Huh? I have a friend that I've been trying to get on Linux. The guy is one of the most ethical people I know, but he is a musician and currently has tools to create on win98. The equivalent tools simply don't exist in Linux (believe me, I've really looked). I'm therefore in the position of telling him to (1. stop creating music, or (2. use his fingernails... not very convincing arguments even if he would otherwise love to use Linux. |
| Inhibit May 11, 2006 1:37 PM EDT |
I think there's a few different arguments running in parallel here. And I kinda want to post on all of 'em :). One appears to be that there were some (at best) "spun" statements, such as Linux making few gains in the driver space in the past 5 years. If we compare the driver support of a five year old kernel vs. the driver support of a current kernel, in devices supported, that'd put paid to that argument. An quick look makes me think he's wrong (remember all those USB drives?). Any takers? Also, there's another parallel train of thought running that including non-free kernel-level software with an actual distribution will start to encourage manufacturers to produce more of the same, whereas up until this point they've been encouraged to provide documentation or crack out GPL/BSD drivers. This may or may not be true from my perspective. It seems more of something that gets handled on a personal basis by developers and argued as a value proposition. And there's a third thread running through about the use of the word Free in the name referring to price rather than freedom of the code. While this is irritating, it's much the same situation as GNU/Linux (which I don't use). The GNU license lets me call a package containing the code whatever I'd like... so while it's cool to complain (especially at the company) if you think the names misleading, there's not much other recourse. Just my 2 cents. |
| helios May 11, 2006 1:37 PM EDT |
How many people do you support who use Linux?..... Presently and on a daily basis? 37 And how many do you support without pay? Presently and on a daily basis? 37 Clinically diaagnosed short-sleeper. Hours between 1 and 4 am are the longest. Choices for filling these hours were few..btw, the Europeans love me. It beats watching info-mercials or degragging hard drives. |
| Inhibit May 11, 2006 1:39 PM EDT |
>> dcparris: I'll admit that _anything_ beats Windows. I've got a few SCO boxes I'd like you to administer... ;) |
| Inhibit May 11, 2006 1:48 PM EDT |
> sbergman27: When one gives a Windows box to a friend of family member, it is always assumed that there is a "kid down the street" that "knows about computers". hah *wipes tear from eye* So who do they go to when the kid down the street turns their shiny new box into a very expensive paper weight? I've seen enough of those come through working tech on machines for people that "have this friend...". The best story was when someone hired a "kid in highschool" to build computers at a new reseller outfit. He screwed the board directly to the case and couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. Point is, people do scary things to machines when they don't have a firm grasp of how they operate. I've seen nothing to suggest to me that competence runs hand in hand with claiming knowledge of Windows. Many of my Windows related service calls had a "kid down the street" as the culprit. They're a very expensive source of aid. |
| grouch May 11, 2006 1:55 PM EDT |
jimf: >"I have a friend that I've been trying to get on Linux. The guy is one of the most ethical people I know, but he is a musician and currently has tools to create on win98. The equivalent tools simply don't exist in Linux (believe me, I've really looked). I'm therefore in the position of telling him to (1. stop creating music, or (2. use his fingernails... not very convincing arguments even if he would otherwise love to use Linux." I don't understand how this fits in with the criticism of Linspire selling closed drivers as a value-add to Linux, and Linspire's claim that such drivers are necessary for Linux to be usable. Would Rosegarden fit his needs? http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/ It had a really good review on O'Reilly's linuxdevcenter back in December, 2004. I'm pretty sure the developers haven't sat still in that time. http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/16/rosegar... It may be that there is no free software that fits his needs, yet. Just in case, have you checked at http://www.linux-sound.org |
| jimf May 11, 2006 2:13 PM EDT |
grouch, The point is that when you need a tool to do a job, the fact that the tool is proprietary or FOSS is secondary to the existence of an adequate tool. Offering proprietary solutions may be the only way to do things. But I agree that Linspire should be more honest and precise in describing proprietary apps and drivers. 'May not work for purpose' may be correct. 'necessary for Linux to be usable', is not. I don't necessarily agree that they 'shouldn't' supply them. Yes, I have checked all those sources, and, continue to do so. We also keep testing different sound oriented Distros. Sooner or later we'll get it :). |
| jdixon May 11, 2006 2:17 PM EDT |
Grouch: I think you forgot about my statements that I would neither use nor recommend Linspire included in my admitly feeble attempts to defend them. I will grant that you are correct and that Linspire has made public statements of... hmm, let's say less than sterling veracity, concerning the necessity for closed source drivers and programs, the usability of other distributions, and the necessity for their CNR service. I agree that they should be publicly criticized for such behavior, and attempts should be made to publicize the true facts. That said, I still don't think Linspire's actions are a signifcant problem. Everyone expects corporations to lie and/or make exaggerated claims (it's called advertising, and most of us have learned to recognize and ignore it). As long as the truth is readily available to those who try to find it, and Linspire doesn't violate the GPL by their actions, I don't have a problem with them marketing their distribution or with users who choose to use it. As I've noted before on other threads, freedom is a wonderful thing. I simply see no reason to choose Linsipre when you can simply use Debian and get almost all the software Linspire is charging you to access via their CNR service for free (and almost as easily with Synaptic). As far as I can tell, Linspire does not offer a compelling enough service to justify their cost. But then again, I'm not a new Windows convert, who's never used a real OS before. Linspire may know their market better than I do. |
| dcparris May 11, 2006 2:24 PM EDT |
> I've got a few SCO boxes I'd like you to administer... ;) At least UNIXWare ain't Windows. :p |
| grouch May 11, 2006 2:48 PM EDT |
jdixon: >"I think you forgot about my statements that I would neither use nor recommend Linspire included in my admitly feeble attempts to defend them." Nope, didn't forget. I've never seen a need to recommend it nor do I use it, either. Those are our personal opinions, which just happen to coincide, and while they may be the result of examining Linspire's offerings and/or means of offering, we could each only offer evidence of why we have those opinions. I can't offer evidence that shows my opinion is the only correct one. I can offer evidence, and have, that Linspire's actions with respect to closed drivers is counter to statements by the kernel developers, that some of Linspire's statements in their "Letter" and their "FAQ" are false, that other distributions have assisted in getting hardware vendors to open their drivers, and that promoting a dependency on closed hardware drivers can cause problems for all users of Linux. >"Everyone expects corporations to lie and/or make exaggerated claims (it's called advertising, and most of us have learned to recognize and ignore it)." I'll agree to the "exaggerated claims", but not the "lie" part. I think businesses should be held to account for deliberate falsehoods. When they make 'em, point 'em out. In this case, there is room for, and has been, debate about whether Linspire deliberately misinforms potential customers. I'll stand on what I've presented as evidence that they do. |
| grouch May 11, 2006 3:14 PM EDT |
jimf: >"[...] Offering proprietary solutions may be the only way to do things. [...] I don't necessarily agree that they 'shouldn't' supply them." (Hope the context is not too mangled with the snips). I don't remember anyone arguing that Linspire shouldn't supply the closed drivers. It's the dishonest way they do it that carries so much potential harm. Customers believing the misinformation reinforce the dependency and reduce the pressure on manufacturers. Look at it this way: I can't tell if you need some closed software for some unknown problem, just as you can't tell if I need one. It would be amazingly stupid of me to claim that you nor anyone else ever needs closed software for anything. IMO, it would also be amazingly stupid of me to tell you that freedom doesn't matter. If I tell you that I will supply you with nVidia drivers, that you can't use Linux without them, that I'm uniquely able to supply them, and that others offering Linux will lock you in and make it too difficult for you to install such drivers that make Linux usable, would you consider me helpful to free software in general and Linux in particular? Hurtful? Would you consider my pitch to be hypocrisy? From your comment that "I agree that Linspire should be more honest and precise in describing proprietary apps and drivers", I think I know your answers to those questions. I just think businesses should not be allowed to get away with things that we would not tolerate in individuals. >"Yes, I have checked all those sources, and, continue to do so. We also keep testing different sound oriented Distros. Sooner or later we'll get it :)." I wish you (and him) well in that search. He'll probably have some relief when you find something to get him off W98. Did you notice that commercial LiveCD at http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/getting/ ? Following their link to http://www.ferventsoftware.com/ shows Fervent has a 'Studio to Go!' demo disk available. (Note one of their FAQ's is "Do you comply with the GPL?"). |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 5:14 PM EDT |
> How many people do you support who use Linux?..... > Presently and on a daily basis? > 37 > And how many do you support without pay? > Presently and on a daily basis? > 37 We've gotta help this guy. I'm not sure how. But we need to help him! :-) |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 5:36 PM EDT |
> I wish you (and him) well in that search. He'll probably have some relief when you find something to get him off W98. It would not occur to anyone here that he might actually be better off with Windows. Not saying that he would be. Just that no one here would consider the possibility. Since Linux is "Teh Best (tm)". I've spent many, many, many hours beating my head against the wall trying to figure out a way to get people off Windows. Then a really revolutionary idea hit me. When I think they are better of with Windows, because it can do this and this and this for them and Linux can't... just acknowledge it, and wait until that's not true anymore. It's done wonders for my sleep. |
| dinotrac May 11, 2006 6:02 PM EDT |
Steve -- I can't imagine that he would be better off with Windows. The most serious (as in they get paid and everything) musicians I know use Macs. Of course, that might just be a matter of taste. |
| sbergman27 May 11, 2006 6:14 PM EDT |
I know. I've been doing web development using Python and TurboGears these days. It's great. I used to think that Mac fans didn't know a command line from a punch line. But I've spent more time delving into the man pages trying to figure out what these Mac guys are talking about than I care to admit. BTW, did I mention that TurboGears is Great? |
| jdixon May 11, 2006 6:57 PM EDT |
sbergman27: > It would not occur to anyone here that he might actually be better off with Windows. OK, for the application in question, he's undoubtably better off with Windows. Satisfied? Now, for a general purpose machine connected to the Internet, he's not better off with Windows. So, in a case like this, use Windows for the applications where it's necessary and get another computer to use for Internet and general purpose use. |
| jdixon May 11, 2006 7:03 PM EDT |
Grouch: > I'll agree to the "exaggerated claims", but not the "lie" part. There's a fine line between exaggerating claims and lying. Reasonable people can disagree about when the line has been crossed. I think that reasonable people will agree that the majority of companies cross that line in their advertising at one time or another. Thus, I conclude that most reasonable people expect companies to lie in their advertising. That's not saying that they do so all the time, or even that all companies do it, merely that given the quantity of advertising encountered by the average person, a significant quantity of it is going to be lies, and that a reasonable person expects this to be the case. |
| jimf May 11, 2006 7:18 PM EDT |
dino, >Macs. Mac is hardly a friend of FOSS. They may treat their customers better, but IMO they are not much better than MS as a company. Linspire looks like a model citizen compared to those guys, but, I still wouldn't recomend any of them. |
| dinotrac May 12, 2006 12:47 AM EDT |
Jimf - Didn't mean to claim that Apple is a friend of FOSS, merely that musicians (and/or graphical artists, and/or video editors) are probably better off with Macs than with Windows. When it's your living, you've got to get the job done. |
| dinotrac May 12, 2006 12:57 AM EDT |
jdixon - The practice of a certain kind of lying is so common in sales, it even has a legal name: puffery. It's hard to define precisely what puffery is, but it more or less encompasses the fact that reasonable people expect salesmen to stretch the truth. For example, do you really believe that coloring the grey in your hair is suddenly going to make you a hot item with the young hotties, or that a certain suit/dress/coat really does look absolutely fabulous on you? That a wireless company keeps you so plugged in that you can spend your workdays dancing to loud music in your office? |
| sbergman27 May 12, 2006 4:23 AM EDT |
> OK, for the application in question, he's undoubtably better off with Windows. Satisfied? I can believe it. But I don't think "satisfied" is the word I'd use. Applications availability is the scourge of my conversion plans for people. If they need some software to help them unk their woodgets but it needs to support blotting you can bet it's available for Windows and "Unk Your Woodgets Now! for Windows (With blotting)" is probably about $29.95. More likely, they already have a copy that they bought when they got their Windows 95 machine that they want you to move over for them. If you look hard enough, there's probably a program called SpLatCh 0.12 alpha that does some of the same stuff in Tcl/Tk. |
| SFN May 12, 2006 4:35 AM EDT |
Quoting:Applications availability is the scourge of my conversion plans for people. It's bad enough with individuals but when it comes to enterprises, the problem is staggering. There are lots of companies that would switch to Open Source if they could have their core apps - even if they have to move to a whole new core app - and would even pay the 5 - 500K it would cost to do it. Whole industries are being convinced that Linux is the way to go but are then being told "unfortunately, there's nothing available for you". Probably the worst part about it is those core apps all existed in various forms of Unix years ago but that was all dropped because enterprises were convinced that Windows was the way to go. |
| sbergman27 May 12, 2006 4:48 AM EDT |
> It's bad enough with individuals but when it comes to enterprises, the problem is staggering. Yep. And that's why these bridges like VMWare, Xen, CXOffice, Samba, closed source modules, (and someday, perhaps Mono) are so critical. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!