View from a different perspective
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| crazyarlo May 10, 2006 5:37 AM EDT |
I have been testing various Linux distributions for years, and have not been able to convert one single person to Linux. My brother's Win 2000 system died, he lost most of the pictures of his new son, and he actually considered doing it. Alas, out of the box, he cannot run those tools that he uses everyday at work .... media files. I have not been able to talk one single person into using Openoffice, even on their PC'S. I have not even been able to convert my long suffering relatives to a Mac! We need to be able to hand someone a disk, and say "here, install this to replace Windows". And in order to do that, it has to work with non-free software. Linspire is accepting the world as it is, attempting to integrate Linux into a primarily Windows world, and making changes from WITHIN. Apple is doing the same thing. Do you know that Apple recently donated two 20" Intel iMacs to the Openoffice project? WHY? Change from within people. Apple knows people need to either run Windows software on their Mac, or run OS X on their PCs. And one of those options is going to happen, and at that point, the better stuff will rise to the top, and Office will finally be challenged. Linux is so much better than it was five years ago. Intallation is easier, software inistallation is easier, peripheral detection and network operations are SO MUCH BETTER! I have an Ubuntu system right behind me here at work that we experiment on, and have all the hated "non free" media files working on it (finally). I am trying to utilize every common application that my peers use to determine the best and easiest WINDOWS REPLACEMENT software. Photo software, MP3 software, burning, drawing, word processing. And still, it's a struggle. I CANNOT JUST HAND SOMEONE A DISK AND KNOW IT WILL WORK. I have to go to their house, mess with the sound card, maybe replace it, download and install a crapload of codecs and libraries then, maybe, it will work. Linux is brilliant. Wonderful. Fun. It's winning the battles, one by one. And losing the war. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 6:30 AM EDT |
Very unusual unsuccess rate you have there. |
| crazyarlo May 10, 2006 6:59 AM EDT |
Yeah, I suck at talking people into stuff! Thank God I didn't go into Marketing!! |
| dinotrac May 10, 2006 7:18 AM EDT |
Don't feel bad. All you've really got to do is run into someone who uses Quickbooks and an accountant. Sigh. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 7:30 AM EDT |
GNUCash and sql-ledger I haven't found a reasonably modern machine yet that Knoppix or Mepis or Damn Small Linux wouldn't "just work" on. |
| tuxchick2 May 10, 2006 7:55 AM EDT |
I officially pronounce this "Linux on the desktop is teh suck except when it is bundled with megabytes of non-free closed-source binaries" the new strawman, and furthermore I pronounce it an organized campaign, aided and abetted by NotVeryFreeSpire. There are many, many, many users for whom even a 100% Free distribution would work perfectly well. Dragging in all this it-won't-play-my-DRM-disks or play nice with my iPod (which by design is incompatible, duh!) is pure FUD and propaganda. For shame! |
| dinotrac May 10, 2006 8:01 AM EDT |
grouch - I don't think you were paying attention. Quickbooks and an accountant. Presuming I could interest my buddy across the street to move his business accounting onto GNUCash, I would then need to convince him to change accountants. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 9:11 AM EDT |
dinotrac: I was paying attention. Last time I looked, GNUCash imports Quickbooks files. The drawback to sql-ledger is that it is such a complete double-entry accounting system that it overwhelms 'mom-and-pop' shops. Each generates reports that even the most stubborn accountant can utilize. |
| dinotrac May 10, 2006 11:29 AM EDT |
grouch - The problem has nothing to do with what GNUCash imports. My friend can swap files back and forth with his accountant (and, BTW -- he uses a part-time book-keeper who is familiar with Quickbooks rather than do the data entry himself). |
| grouch May 10, 2006 11:46 AM EDT |
dinotrac: Ah, then your previous statement, "[a]ll you've really got to do is run into someone who uses Quickbooks and an accountant" really meant someone who is unwilling to give up the familiarity of Quickbooks for something free, regardless of the benefits of the free software. That's different. If they don't see the benefits out-weighing the risks and the learning period, there's not much you can do beyond the explanation and the offer. |
| dcparris May 10, 2006 1:06 PM EDT |
> I have been testing various Linux distributions for years, and have not been able to convert one single person to Linux. Well, I can't claim to have helped hundreds either. Still, I have helped at least two families directly, and helped some of my co-workers discover the beauty of GNU/Linux. There is now a movement within the company to move toward FOSS solutions, but it will come slowly - veeeerrrryyyy slowly. Ironically, thanks to my efforts, most of the IT staff I deal with regularly are now running Macs. Well, at least they're off of Windows. ;-) |
| dinotrac May 10, 2006 1:16 PM EDT |
grouch: No. It's somebody who has a good working relationship with his accountant. Good working relationships are not an evil concept, and, I would argue, outweigh (for him) the difference between free and non-free software. Now -- Strike out the accountant...and maybe things change. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 4:39 PM EDT |
dinotrac: >"No. It's somebody who has a good working relationship with his accountant. Good working relationships are not an evil concept, and, I would argue, outweigh (for him) the difference between free and non-free software." I did not say good working relationships are an evil concept. I would argue with you that it is up to him to decide the balance of risk, cost and benefits. For me, free software weighs heavily on the balance because I have piles of expensive abandonware and have spent far too many years digging out of dependency holes. There was one business I never managed to get out of one hole. It was swallowed by a bigger one before the last dependency was removed. That dependency was a continuous risk to them as the software involved had been abandoned by the vendor many years ago. It was propped up with bandaids and duct tape while being called on to handle more data than it was designed to deal with. Free software doesn't just make philosophical sense. It makes real business sense, with real dollars involved, as well. |
| tuxchick2 May 10, 2006 5:02 PM EDT |
jdixon said something that has stuck with me: "> BUT, what is the ultimate goal? Displace Microsoft? Offer a reasonable alternative OS? Increase market share? Make the world a better place? You'll get different answers from different people, though I suspect all will agree with number 2 and number 4. For number 1, see above. Number 3: Most Linux folks don't really care about market share, if Linux meets their needs that's good enough. They want Linux to be a good operating system. If it displaces Microsoft (which most of us do NOT view as producing a good operating system), that's icing on the cake." Pretty much reflects how I feel about it. I don't particularly care about "converting" people to Linux, that's not even on my radar. I wouldn't give microshaft a second thought if the dirty buggers would just leave us alone. Nobody picked a fight with them- it's their modus operandi to crush any and all opposition, whether real or perceived, and to own 100% of the market by any means except superior products and service. They've done more to damage computing than to help it. They are directly responsible for the lack of hardware and software support for other platforms, and don't even get me started on their predatory mangling of standards and interoperability, and lies and propaganda. If it were not for their organized-crime type business tactics, we would see a much more varied computer marketplace, and for all that they deserve to fail and wither away. |
| dinotrac May 10, 2006 5:08 PM EDT |
>Free software doesn't just make philosophical sense. It makes real business sense, with real dollars involved, as well. You will get no argument from me on that score, but you're preaching to the choir. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 7:38 PM EDT |
tuxchick2: >"I wouldn't give microshaft a second thought if the dirty buggers would just leave us alone." (I could quote your whole post, but that line sums up nicely, I think). Two different means to world domination: 1. By hook or by crook (force, at many levels) 2. By setting people free (invitation) dinotrac: >"You will get no argument from me on that score, but you're preaching to the choir." (Before I get to that, I bet you can't tell me where "by hook or by crook" orginates. Stay away from that search; let's see how paleozoic you really are!) Brothers and sisters, I have BEEN to the moutaintop and mine eyes have SEEN the penguin and the li'l beastie trampling the broken shards into the dust of forgotten nightmares! Take up thy burden with the GNU and set thy brethren free from the cage of the predator. Let not thine eyes be BLINDED by the glitter of the paint on the bars, for he prepareth an subtle LOCK which even the wealthiest of the acronyms may loose. Fear not the corruption of the Enslaving User Lock-in Agreement for thou hast an Great and Powerful Lance by thy side. Keep thy source free from entanglements, lest thy Hacker brethren and sistren be powerless in their quest to smite the thornbushes and brambles of concealment laid down by the wicked to entrap thee. Use thy powers of freedoms to Code and to Communicate to prepare a path for the least fortunate of the multitude to trod with thee out of the cages and the traps of the lords of False Scarcity. Build thy house not upon the quicksand of the Demons' Repugnant Maliciousness, but upon the Foundation Of Stability and Square-dealing. Take up the righteous fight to save thy freedom to choose when and whether thy shalt upgrade, to choose to customize beyond the placement of the beguiling icons and wallpapers, to build upon thy hard-won knowledge without having it rendered to nothingness by the stroke of the predator's Pak, to look within thine own computer to see what majicks it works and whether it works for thee or the enemy of thy freedom, to share thine work with thy neighbor without fear of the Bullies of Selfishness Attacking thee, to use thy computer as thee shall see fit, instead of having it used to thy detriment. Let not thy head be turned by false Vistas which lure with twisted promises. Gird thyself with armor as liken to the Blowfish, keep thy manula at hand, step mightily on the bugs in thy path, fear not the trolls, yea, nor even the false grass laid before thy feet, and raise your voices high enough that even the Connivers within the walls of governments shall hear and tremble at the power of thy multitudinous cry for Freedom! Keep thy faith, but verify thy code, both within and without the source and Tux shall indeed serve the world with freedom for the almighty user! |
| dinotrac May 10, 2006 8:20 PM EDT |
grouch -- Beats me. I only know that the expression is **really old**. Older than me even, by an order of magnitude or more. I always took it literally -- hook or Shephard's crook. I know some other interpretations have been suggested, but....I can't remember what they are. I think it's usually agreed to mean "by any means", without regard to niceties, legalities, or cream cheese. |
| grouch May 10, 2006 8:34 PM EDT |
dinotrac: I will take a screenshot and wave it viciously in your direction for millenia to come! (Even though your reference to a hook or Shephard's crook come close.) "By hook or by crook" originates from the rules by which a tenant might gather firewood from his lord's lands. Dead limbs which would snap cleanly were permitted to be harvested; no cutting of live trees or limbs was tolerated. The peasant could gather this deadwood using his hook or crook, but could not risk damaging live limbs by climbing. I can offer no online reference. It's in some dusty book hiding somewhere around here. |
| tuxchick2 May 10, 2006 8:53 PM EDT |
I pass the collection plate. I keep the collection plate. Thank you, that was fun! |
| jimf May 10, 2006 9:05 PM EDT |
Would appear that grouch is correct. http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20010418 |
| grouch May 10, 2006 9:17 PM EDT |
jimf: Hey, thanks for the link! That talks about the forests of the "sovereign", but I was close. It gives the first written English usage as implying the same as dinotrac gave, "by any means". tuxchick2: Ahem. Members of the choir get the robes and the privilege of shouting, "Amen!" at opportune times. The sermonizer gets the plate and contents. Incentive to continue, doncha know. Do you have make-up that streams on demand? We might talk about a cut. |
| helios May 11, 2006 2:54 AM EDT |
Members of the choir get the robes and the privilege of..... Preachers and Vicars with a bit more "street sense" long ago forbade those long, flowing choir robes for the choir. Now, the proper dress is black slacks or skirts, depending upon your plumbing or orientation, and a nice white shirt. Millions have been lost to the churches under those robes. You could sneak out a Buick under those things. |
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!