Quoth Derek Neighbors
> I can NOT agree with this statement in any way shape or form. .doc is a
> PERFECT example of closed standard. It is the 'standard' because everyone
> uses is, but is surely isn't 'open'. Currently people have reverse
> engineered to support it, and now of course that is also illegal.
I think you and I agree on this point. I would not call a standard
"something everyone uses". That's popularity or prevalence. A standard is
an agreed upon measurement or procedure. Therefore Closed standard is an
oxymoron and .doc is a prevalent format made that way from a proven monopoly.
> The problem is windows doesn't just work. Having to reboot hourly and
> having to reinstall the operating system annually and being forced to
> upgrade for obnoxious dollar values while rending working programs
> worthless isn't just 'working'.
Windows does work right after you install it. Microsoft takes a "{insert
hater company} tech support lackey" approach to why windows doesn't work 2
weeks after you have it installed.
"What did you just do?" "You installed software from someone else?" "Yeah
that would be the problem goodbye"
That is a problem. In the long term, in an installed user base, Windows
doesn't just work. I haven't installed a MSOS for personal use in over 6
months. I can't stand it. But my point of "it just working (barely)" for
the non-tech still holds. Your anecdote about a Nero Rom burner issue could
very well apply to me and trying to get my network card to work under Redhat
7.3 (Constant locking of the machine that doesn't happen with the same
configuration of the system under 2000 Pro). If I call Netgear, I am sure I
will be told to install Microsoft because that is their officially supported
software and my problem won't happen. Linux is a superior OS who is hampered
in joining the market by the market being closed due to monopoly. Vendors
won't deal with linux, support from hardware manufacturers is rare in some
cases and most of what's going on is morally wrong (assuming capitalism is
moral, leave that for another discussion) or illegal by US law.
That must come to an end. However, I am of the opinion that Linux could rule
tomorrow if it had a charismatic and popular leader, company, or figurehead.
Any leader that currently exists out there can be dismissed by your local
"non-techie" as a) a geek and who cares about geek stuff b) a zealot and we
all should hate zealots or c) an anti-microsoft pundit (or worse 733t hax0r)
with nothing better to do than hate M$ and spell with numbers.
The third option is the easiest to overcome by each of us knowing exactly
what is good and bad about Microsoft and explaining carefully those points
that would convince people to change over. Not by telling them we hate IE
because they killed Netscape (my mom doesn't care) or that "The M$ tax is
illegal". The "Microsoft tax" isn't a tax to people who believe that Windows
is as integral as the motherboard or the chip. Its a question of flys with
honey or vinegar. Pissing on Microsoft is pissing vinegar. Tellling folks
you haven't rebooted in 6 months or that you converted your machine at work
and no one in the office can tell but you is the honey they need to hear.
PLUG (I feel, which is why I attend meetings) is a honey pot of continuing to
do right =)
> Its a proposition of freedom. No one says there is NO value in supporting
> .doc, but being CHAINED by the .doc format is detrimental. We really need
> to break free into an open and free format. This is similar to the mp3 vs
> ogg debate. Finally .ogg has been vindicated some since the patent holder
> to mp3 might finally start really being restrictive.
>
> .doc might be how they play baseball, but if you have to give all your
> lunch money to bill to be able to use the bat to play in the game, isn't
> getting your butt kicked and being a called a dork, and aligning with
> 'better' friends to start your own game a better proposition?
Be careful with your generalizations, because lots of people say there is NO
value in supporting .doc. They aren't right, but we can't stop them from
saying it. You and I both agree that there is, for the time being, until we
can supplant it with an open standard and a lot of folks agree with us, but
the "knee-jerkers" will tell you "down with M$, F*** Bill, burn Redmond"
>
> > Evolution is great for this. Search your email logs or slashdot for
> > "Ximian
> > Connector is ANTI-OPENSOURCE!!!" Exchange is how they play Hopscotch on
> > this block, better learn the rules.
>
> It is ANTI OPENSOURCE. No one is mad that Evolution supports exchange,
> they are mad that Ximian has broken its COMMITTMENTS to writing free
> software.
Ximian as a company is pro-open source, but see a way to make money in a
capitalist economy by supporting the current "highly prevalent" corporate
mail protocol. From where I sit, the price of Ximian Connector will be paid
by CEOs who deploy MS Exchange in the office. It will be requested by those
grass-roots workers who switch their company boxes to Linux and still need to
support Exchange. Ximian gets Corporate money. I can't fathom someone
setting up and exchange server in their home with Linux boxes and buying
Ximian Connector to have things happen.
>
> > Samba is great for this. How many gigabytes of bandwidth have been
> > wasted on
> > "Why are you using Samba, just switch to Linux and use NFS, its works
> > better." Samba is how you play hide-and-seek here, folks.
>
> Again this is the try to avoid lockin. People making these arguments are
> trying to unchain you.
But the point is this. My roomate uses Windows 2000 because he's into games.
He spent his cash on a Radeon 8500 which is not currently supported by Linux.
He wants to game with 3d acceleration and he wants to play all the games that
are out there on the shelf. I also want to share files with him across the
network. I NEED samba. If I had a problem with samba, someone telling me to
switch to NFS doesn't help me and it doesn't help the community. When
someone has a problem, they would like to get it fixed, not re-install their
OS. Someday they will have a problem so big that reinstalling is their only
optiion. And if they know Linux is gratis/libre/better, then they are
probably going to switch if they think they can get good support from a grass
roots community.
>
> Microsoft is not the enemy, just one of the strongest solidiers in its
> army. The enemy is proprietary software and data formats. I agree that
> the M$ helps no one. In fact, there used to be a saying....
>
> BSD users love Unix.
> Linux users just hate Microsoft.
You made two statements, the first of which I just deleted, about the rules
of the game "being unfair and run by liars and cheats" The next statement
that I left in is that MS is the strongest soldier in the army. You're right
on both counts, but it leads to a bigger truth is this: If MS is an army,
then we need to be one too. Because this is a war. There is no "cheating,
lying, being unfair" in war. It simply is horrible. Now calling this a war
(from the first world I am sure I look like an incredible hypocrite saying
that not being able to run my favorite software on a $2000 machine in front
of me is horrible or akin to war) might be over reacting, but its getting
there. And if we remember that we need every soldier we can get, then we are
doing good for our cause.
I'd actually love to meet you in person Derek, do you attend the meetings?
which side of town?
Kyle Faber
(text/plain)